Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

City by the Lake.org, The Voice of Michigan City, Indiana _ City Talk _ North end could be "choice area"

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 17 2008, 08:07 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=8710&TM=32796.78

QUOTE
Oberlie: North End Can Be 'Choice' Area

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - In his annual state-of-the-city address last week, Mayor Chuck Oberlie outlined his fast-track plans for the city's North End in hopes that after the first quarter of 2008, the engine of change will be humming.

Saying the area isn't pedestrian friendly or visually pleasing, he hopes the results of three studies laying out possibilities for the North End turn the area - through a unified vision - into the city's "neighborhood of choice."

"The beauty of it all is that I outlined 21 different projects, and all of them will be moving forward as of (Thursday)," he said. "And they can all move forward without hurting the others."

Oberlie also released a small portfolio featuring a few ideas for North End redevelopment gleaned from three studies the city has commissioned in the last two years.

The most visually striking of the ideas is a large residential and commercial area along Trail Creek which, in theory, would include three large high-rise buildings just across the creek from Blue Chip Casino.

Oberlie's thoughts are that developing the Trail Creek Corridor from Eighth Street to Washington Park would turn the city's North End into the crown jewel of the city.

His hopes aren't without precedent.

Although its size pales in comparison to that of Michigan City, the town of Saugatuck, Mich., benefits greatly from a developed Kalamazoo River, which houses not only hundreds of private boat slips, but residences, shops and restaurants like those Oberlie envisions for Trail Creek. "Our boating industry is a huge element of our success, if not the lifeblood of our town," second-term Saugatuck Mayor Tony Vettori said Friday. "And it's all due to the fact that there's so much to do right along the river. It brings in boaters and non-boaters."

Like Michigan City, Saugatuck features a river that leads to a large, heavily used beach and the waters of Lake Michigan. Vettori said the beach benefits from the downtown river scene, just as the downtown benefits from the beach and Lake Michigan.

"We've become an art destination and a shopping destination. And Oval Beach is rated one of the top 10 beaches in the country," Vettori said. "The water is all a part of what draws people here, and I'd think it would have the same effect in Michigan City."

Posted by: Dave Jan 17 2008, 11:02 AM

When I was in high school, my parents had a cottage with a Saugatuck address, three or four miles by water from downtown Saugatuck.

Saugatuck has a long history of development along the river. Anyone who has been there knows that the entire downtown area is no more than four blocks from the Kalamazoo River, which is a navigable river for miles and miles, unlike our little Trail Creek. Saugatuck started off as a logging town (google Singapore, MIchigan for more info), and became an artist colony in the early 1900's. They had enough sense to turn to tourism as their main industry some time ago. According to wikipedia, the year round population is about 1000, but summer population is about 3000. I'm not sure how much of a model Saugatuck can be for MC, given the difference in scale.

However, one point does hit home. The key to north end redevelopment is Lake Michigan, which is to say boating and boat slips. Those proposed high rises are going to empty unless a sizable percentage of the owners are going to have boat slips to go with their condos. MIchigan City is for all practical purposes the only town in Indiana with access to Lake Michigan for recreational boating, and we need to capitalize on that. The owners of the proposed condos are going to be Chicago people buying second homes. I have no problem with Chicago people spending money here, tourism dollars and property taxes for second homes that they use only a small part of the year, and I have to question the sanity and/or smarts of anyone who does have a problem with it.

For purposes of north end redevelopment, the two primary resources we have are the lake and our proximity to Chicago. In my mind's eye, Chicago is like a vein of ore that we have to mine. And that ore, my friends, is cash.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 17 2008, 01:42 PM

See, that is the problem. You do not see the long-run effect of removing the waterfront from public access. Oh, well.

Posted by: Dave Jan 17 2008, 03:46 PM

Does the waterfront on Trail Creek from US 12 south have any significant public access now? When I look at it on Google Maps, what I see is the casino from US 12 to the E street bridge on the east side, and Blocksom and a marina on the west side. What public access are we going to lose?

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 17 2008, 04:00 PM

The point is that it is already lost. I want it regained so that there will be a better reason (or any) to develop more than the immediate waterfront.

Posted by: Ang Jan 17 2008, 04:39 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jan 17 2008, 03:00 PM) *

The point is that it is already lost. I want it regained so that there will be a better reason (or any) to develop more than the immediate waterfront.

Good point. I agree

Posted by: Dave Jan 17 2008, 06:10 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jan 17 2008, 04:00 PM) *

The point is that it is already lost. I want it regained so that there will be a better reason (or any) to develop more than the immediate waterfront.


Have you looked at the Lohan Anderson Trail Creek Plan, Roger?

http://www.emichigancity.com/cityhall/departments/planning/pdf/Lohan_Anderson_Trail_Creek_Plan.pdf

What I am seeing in that plan is public access to Trail Creek which we currently do not have, some retail establishments along the creek, and the balance would be residences. However, it appears to me that the actual creek edge is accessible to the public for the whole length.

While I am as skeptical about all the "plans" and "studies" as anyone, this one looks pretty good to me. Implementation is something else all together, but unless you want to turn everything between the creek and Michigan Blvd. into a grassy park (which would do absolutely nothing in regards to helping the north end -- who's going to stop there to look at a ditch when they can go a couple miles further and be on Lake Michigan?), the Lohan Anderson plan is a vast improvement over the way things are now.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 17 2008, 10:23 PM

Has anyone in Michigan City wondered why the State of the City address happened in the first week of January? Right smack on top of the sanitary district hiring debacle, instead of the usual second or third week in February. Has anyone looked at the fact it calls for putting all our eggs in a plan that calls for housing lots of housing, upscale housing. Sorry neighbors, but we have got to get our heads out of the clouds. This plan, this concept new urban renewal, huge investment in the housing market is about ten years to late. Oberlie at this for over 35 years, starting in the planning dept. has not got a clue. He head is not in the clouds it is up his..... well, you know what I mean. I work for a family business, part of our business involves building and selling upscale housing. The last one we did sold for 2.2 million dollars, we sold it in December of 2006. We have not even bothered looking at another parcel of property since. Why? Because the housing market is in the dumps. The sub prime lending has not even fully hit us yet and the banks are not very free at lending money right now. What we will end up with is a north end that looks like Roger Willoughbys Michigan Boulevard gas station development.
If you go back to Mr. Oberlies last State of the City address you will find a call to work at ridding Michigan City of the neglected and abandoned properties in our neighborhoods. He said we must find ways to attract people back into our neighborhoods. What did Oberlie lay as the foundation to accomplish this? We started the year off issuing building permits to a very controversial housing complex at the questionable outskirts of town in a cornfield. Next change the zoning in a residential neighborhood to commercial and issue building permits to erect a gas station in a residential neighborhood, across the street from a park. (judge saw it as wrong and overturned it thank God) We ended the year allowing a car crushing junk yard the permit to operate a couple of hundred feet away from an area he claims he is trying to attract family's to live.
The inspection Dept. has no teeth to go after the property owners to keep up their property, we do nothing to change a system. A system we know does not work. I have one of these boarded up houses right out my front door. It has been this way since Chuck has been in charge. As long as Michigan City continues doing the same thing, the same way it will be there till he is gone.
So Michigan City be warned, this North End plan on the Oberlie fast track may just run us all over.

WASHINGTON (AP) - United for urgent action, the White House and Congress raced toward emergency steps Thursday to rescue the national economy from a possible recession, including tax rebates of at least $300 a person - and maybe as much as $800. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke endorsed the idea of putting money into the hands of those who would spend it quickly and boost the flagging economy.

All the talk of rescue efforts failed to soothe Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrials plunged 306.95 points, underscoring deepening concern about the country's economic health.

The sudden scramble to take action came as fears mounted that a severe housing slump and a painful credit crisis could cause people to clamp down on their spending and businesses to put a lid on hiring, throwing the country into its first recession since 2001.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 18 2008, 07:27 AM

Did anyone else watch the unveiling of the north end plan last night? A great idea and plan, but I think Ilove is right, 10 years too late. I just don't know where you are going to find a developer to pony up that kind of cash in this time.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 18 2008, 08:18 AM

I did forget to post the preview I got from Alderman Murphy. There are links to the plan that was presented last night.

QUOTE
Dear Friends,

Many of you are aware of the exciting plans that have been put forth
for the redevelopment of Michigan City's North End. Please see links
below to access these plans online.


1) The Elston Grove Streetscape Project

This was a project to set guidelines for new streetscape
infrastructure in our historic district of Elston Grove. Neighbors
worked with consultant JJR, Chicago in a series of visioning sessions
to set guidelines on decorative lighting, gateway features, pocket
parks, bikepaths, historic signage and other features.
Implementation is set to happen in the next year.



2) The Lohan Anderson Reuse plan for the Trail Creek Corridor and
Memorial Hospital Property

The result again of input from Michigan City citizens, business
people, and city leaders working with renowned architects, Lohan
Anderson, Chicago to propose a reuse plan for our Trail Creek. The
result will be an attractive downtown waterfront amenity for Michigan
CIty residents and visitors to enjoy.



BOTH OF THE ABOVE PLANS CAN BE ACCESSED @:

http://www.emichigancity.com/cityhall/departments/planning/index.htm



3) The Andrews University North End Plan.

The 28 Andrews University students under Professor Andrew Von Maur
held a series of public meetings where residents, business people,
public officials, and architects and urban designs with national
reputations put forth ideas. The ideas were captured and enhanced by
the students in a comprehensive plan. The result is a phenomenal
document. Currently it is in draft form. The final Andrew’s
University presentation will take place on Thursday, January 17 at
6:30 p.m. in the Michigan City Council Chambers.


THIS PLAN CAN BE ACCESSED AT:

http://www.andrewsurbandesign.org/


Let's get the word out. In these plans, are the makings of a World
Class City.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 18 2008, 12:32 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=8865

QUOTE
Andrews Shows Off North End Study
University officials stress changes don’t have to be quick.

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Residents on Thursday were given their first real look at the study that officials feel could transform the city's North End.

Instructors and students from the Andrews University Urban Design Studio presented the final results of their early fall study to an overflowing crowd at Michigan City City Hall.

The study, commissioned last summer, not only gave ideas for utilization of new retail, residential units and green space, but also presented a way to refit the city's zoning process. That would make the study's conclusions more feasible.

"Everything we've done here is a proposal that has to be taken to the next level," said Andrew Von Maur, the head of the design studio and facilitator of the study.

"It's not a 100-percent blueprint to follow, but it shows how development should work. It's a visionary illustration that's supposed to help guide the decision-making process."

The study focused on creating "meat" in the middle of what many call the city's "Golden Triangle,"the area between Lighthouse Place Premium Outlets, Blue Chip Casino and Washington Park.

Andrews students designed wholesale changes not only at the edges of the triangle, but in the middle, as well, including parks and new buildings, all of which Von Maur said would make the city more pedestrian friendly.

"We want to turn the triangle into a diamond by utilizing the South Shore (railroad on 11th Street)," he said. "Franklin Street is a pretty good district, but it's surrounded by a non-pedestrian friendly environment. The study shows how to change that."

Along with making Franklin Street a two-way street and creating a shopping and residential mecca along Trail Creek, the study also showed how to utilize Washington Park more efficiently.

The study makes use of beach as a "front yard to the city," by creating a grassy area with an amphitheater on one side and a restaurant on the other.

Parks Superintendent Darrell Garbacik liked the idea.

"It looks surprisingly like the parks' Master Plan," Garbacik said. He was referring to a plan introduced last year that included many ideas the Andrews study encompassed, including a restaurant. "And I think it looks pretty darn cool."

One of the more interesting aspects of the study, Von Maur said, is its introduction of, and recommendation of, a new zoning plan called SmartCode. SmartCode sets up zones based on the type of environment the city seeks instead of specific uses.

The code more easily blends different types of uses into one area to fit the idea of what officials would like the area to become. Von Maur said the study should be phased in over generations.

Mayor Chuck Oberlie already has laid out plans to begin work on some of the ideas as soon as this year.

"These are all bold ideas. Some people are ready to start today," Von Maur said. "But some aren't. This is something that should be phased in over time."

Contact reporter Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.


Posted by: Dave Jan 18 2008, 12:49 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jan 18 2008, 07:27 AM) *

Did anyone else watch the unveiling of the north end plan last night? A great idea and plan, but I think Ilove is right, 10 years too late. I just don't know where you are going to find a developer to pony up that kind of cash in this time.

I was at the meeting last night. I was the guy standing next to Rich Murphy, if you were there southsider. There's supposed to be a poll about it on the N-D website, but I'm not finding it, just the article at:
http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=8865&TM=49192.93

which I see on preview Southsider has quoted already.



Two things I really like about this study -- first, they come down hard against the idea of moving the 11th street South Shore station, actually making the station a major part of their plan, and second (which isn't mentioned in the N-D article), they remove the library and city hall and run Franklin back out to the lake.

I do agree that this plan isn't going to happen tomorrow. With the sub-prime lending market imploding, and with the current admin in City Hall, it just isn't happening until the next election cycle.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 18 2008, 12:54 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 18 2008, 12:49 PM) *

I was at the meeting last night. I was the guy standing next to Rich Murphy, if you were there southsider. There's supposed to be a poll about it on the N-D website, but I'm not finding it, just the article at:
http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=8865&TM=49192.93

which I see on preview Southsider has quoted already.
Two things I really like about this study -- first, they come down hard against the idea of moving the 11th street South Shore station, actually making the station a major part of their plan, and second (which isn't mentioned in the N-D article), they remove the library and city hall and run Franklin back out to the lake.

I do agree that this plan isn't going to happen tomorrow. With the sub-prime lending market imploding, and with the current admin in City Hall, it just isn't happening until the next election cycle.


I did not go, but I watched it on Ch 97.

I did find it interesting that after blasting Joie Winski's idea to move the library during the election cycle, the ND was 100% silent on that being a centerpiece of this plan, along with some major revamps of City Hall.

Posted by: Max Main Jan 18 2008, 02:09 PM

I thought (re)moving the library was interesting, but still think it is not Necessary. I dont see why all the building would happen in between all the shops on mich Blvd Franklin.

The best thing was the idea of making it a Gold Diamond, instead of, a Golden Triangle, by developing the 11th street South Shore station: Franklin St Bridge--8th and Mich--Station--Lighthouse place(let's say 6th and Wabash). Potratz the architect has talked about the east/west corridor as a neglected key part of any plan, prob along 6th st.

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 18 2008, 08:43 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jan 17 2008, 01:42 PM) *

See, that is the problem. You do not see the long-run effect of removing the waterfront from public access. Oh, well.


I've got to disagree with you on this one, Rog. For the City to benefit, waterfront redevelopment has to be about best use. From the Franklin St. bridge to the E St. bridge, it is all about boat slips. The general public is going to have little interest in walking along the creek side between those two points when they can take in a better view at Millenium Park or walk the catwalk to the Lighthouse. We have public access to waterfront property at the Indiana Lakeshore/Mt. Baldy, Washington Park, Millenium Park, Peanut Bridge, Krueger Park and International Friendship Gardens. I don't feel deprived.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 18 2008, 09:59 PM

QUOTE(Max Main @ Jan 18 2008, 02:09 PM) *

I thought (re)moving the library was interesting, but still think it is not Necessary. I dont see why all the building would happen in between all the shops on mich Blvd Franklin.

The best thing was the idea of making it a Gold Diamond, instead of, a Golden Triangle, by developing the 11th street South Shore station: Franklin St Bridge--8th and Mich--Station--Lighthouse place(let's say 6th and Wabash). Potratz the architect has talked about the east/west corridor as a neglected key part of any plan, prob along 6th st.

The Golden Triangle did not work. Trying a failed plan over only bigger sounds just like what Oberlie would do. Winski's plan so for is the only one that would attract developers to use their money instead of ours.

Posted by: Dave Jan 18 2008, 10:11 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 18 2008, 09:59 PM) *

The Golden Triangle did not work. Trying a failed plan over only bigger sounds just like what Oberlie would do. Winski's plan so for is the only one that would attract developers to use their money instead of ours.


I have to disagree here. The Golden Triangle was never anything that would "work," is simply is. The main features of the north end are the casino boat, the lakefront, and the outlet mall. That is a simple fact. It's also a fact that no one has done anything to use the "Golden Triangle" to jump start north end redevelopment even though it has been talked about since the original Andersen plan.
Though there have been major steps backward (can you say "Franklin Square"?) which were implemented by certain people who are still running the show.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 18 2008, 10:43 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 18 2008, 10:11 PM) *

I have to disagree here. The Golden Triangle was never anything that would "work," is simply is. The main features of the north end are the casino boat, the lakefront, and the outlet mall. That is a simple fact. It's also a fact that no one has done anything to use the "Golden Triangle" to jump start north end redevelopment even though it has been talked about since the original Andersen plan.
Though there have been major steps backward (can you say "Franklin Square"?) which were implemented by certain people who are still running the show.

I agree with most of your post. The part I disagree with is that the triangle is part of it. When Sheila was on the committee selecting the company to receive the license here, she chose Blue Chip and its upstream location. Solely to create the Golden Triangle. The other two firms were offering between 15 and 20 million more per year through the agreement of suitability. Just having the Golden Triangle would revitalize downtown MC by itself. Never happened. When other Cities with boats are getting 5-8% of the adjusted gross revenue, we are getting a whopping .6%

Posted by: Dave Jan 19 2008, 12:35 PM

I was unaware of that bit of history, lovethiscity. Before my time.

So the riverboat was placed where it is, and potential revenues from it were substantially reduced, in order to create the "Golden Triangle," with the expectation that the "Golden Triangle effect" would revitalize the north end. And then the architects of that plan, who were for the most part the architects of the Franklin Square plan which killed the north end to begin with, stepped back and waited for... I dunno, magic to happen, and the north end would resurrect itself.

I really wish someone would write a History of Michigan City which would include all this stuff. I'd pay real money for a copy of that. Stuff like which families are the prominent MC families (I'm a newcomer here, during the last primary my reaction to LaRocco was "Who?"), stuff like the history of the airport (the old one where Menard's is now, the attempt by our town fathers to scam the FAA out of grant money, and the resulting purchase of the current airport), the whole Franklin Square debacle, etc. Stuff that the LaPorte County Historical Society would find a bit too current to concern themselves with. Maybe I should check out some of their stuff anyway.

Posted by: JHeath Jan 19 2008, 06:32 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 19 2008, 12:35 PM) *

I really wish someone would write a History of Michigan City which would include all this stuff. I'd pay real money for a copy of that. Stuff like which families are the prominent MC families (I'm a newcomer here, during the last primary my reaction to LaRocco was "Who?"), stuff like the history of the airport (the old one where Menard's is now, the attempt by our town fathers to scam the FAA out of grant money, and the resulting purchase of the current airport), the whole Franklin Square debacle, etc. Stuff that the LaPorte County Historical Society would find a bit too current to concern themselves with. Maybe I should check out some of their stuff anyway.

It would be interesting to see. Wonder who they'd include...the Barker and Ruby families would be obvious. I'd like to think the Winski's would make it in too.

Posted by: JHeath Jan 19 2008, 06:41 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jan 18 2008, 12:54 PM) *

I did not go, but I watched it on Ch 97.

I did find it interesting that after blasting Joie Winski's idea to move the library during the election cycle, the ND was 100% silent on that being a centerpiece of this plan, along with some major revamps of City Hall.

SSider, I've been wondering the same thing all along. But, if it goes through, they should have no problem finding enough private developers to make it happen.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 20 2008, 07:37 PM

The most realistic plan I have heard so far is levitation like when Abbie Hoffmann lifted the Pentagon a while back. I could set it down on the Mem Hosp site.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 20 2008, 09:47 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 19 2008, 12:35 PM) *

I was unaware of that bit of history, lovethiscity. Before my time.

So the riverboat was placed where it is, and potential revenues from it were substantially reduced, in order to create the "Golden Triangle," with the expectation that the "Golden Triangle effect" would revitalize the north end. And then the architects of that plan, who were for the most part the architects of the Franklin Square plan which killed the north end to begin with, stepped back and waited for... I dunno, magic to happen, and the north end would resurrect itself.

Yes, Dave as stupid as it sounds this is true. While since the boat opened, we have recieved aprox. 18 million through the agreement of suitability. There is a City in Indiana that got that much last year alone through the same agreement of suitability.

I really wish someone would write a History of Michigan City which would include all this stuff. I'd pay real money for a copy of that. Stuff like which families are the prominent MC families (I'm a newcomer here, during the last primary my reaction to LaRocco was "Who?"), stuff like the history of the airport (the old one where Menard's is now, the attempt by our town fathers to scam the FAA out of grant money, and the resulting purchase of the current airport), the whole Franklin Square debacle, etc. Stuff that the LaPorte County Historical Society would find a bit too current to concern themselves with. Maybe I should check out some of their stuff anyway.

The history truthfully written as it has happened in the last 35 years would be taken as a fictional comedy. For instance as City Planner Oberlie tried to increase traffic on North Franklin and for the last ten years has been attempting through highways to nowhere in corn fields to take traffic off South Franklin. This guy has no clue. The thought of hiring a traffic study is out of the question. This is from the City that does nothing but pay for studies

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 21 2008, 09:28 AM

Oberlie has NO BUSINESS being involved in city gov't. He was part of the planning crew that got us into such a position. He does not have the vision or brains to lead us out. MC: Fools for electing him, durn fools for re-electing him.

Posted by: JHeath Jan 21 2008, 11:37 AM

Roger, most of us here would agree with you on that, but more of his supports came out to vote than the other 2 candidates combined...and that was a long time ago. It's time to move on, and find other ways to continue to be involved in improving the City...not just compaining with no action.

Posted by: ChickenCityRoller Jan 21 2008, 12:15 PM

Ancient history here but I consider this the first fatal flaw our founding fathers made

IPB Image

Hoosier Slide, standing 175 feet tall on the west bank of Trail Creek, dominated the area's landscape for centuries. Tourists from all parts of the world arrived by excursion trains and ships to climb the huge sand dune, rewarded at the top with a spectacular view. Like many other lake dunes, Hoosier Slide was mined for use as land fill and in glass making. By the 1920's, nothing remained of the giant dune.



Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 21 2008, 01:42 PM

My point is that we see the error because we pay the opportunity cost which was essentially ignored at the time. I do not want people in the CBTL forum in 75 years to be complaining about the run-down buildings along the lake and creek and wondering how they are going to clean up the area and make it attractive.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 21 2008, 06:11 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jan 21 2008, 01:42 PM) *

My point is that we see the error because we pay the opportunity cost which was essentially ignored at the time. I do not want people in the CBTL forum in 75 years to be complaining about the run-down buildings along the lake and creek and wondering how they are going to clean up the area and make it attractive.

I agree Roger, with the park board now well represented on the City Council. They will soon push to change the legislation so they can put a hotel on Bismark Hill, The last Dune in the park. We should not sit around and say nothing. We need to keep the failures up front so we do not continue repeating them.

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 21 2008, 10:22 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jan 21 2008, 01:42 PM) *

My point is that we see the error because we pay the opportunity cost which was essentially ignored at the time. I do not want people in the CBTL forum in 75 years to be complaining about the run-down buildings along the lake and creek and wondering how they are going to clean up the area and make it attractive.


Tell me, with some specifics, how Joie Winski would be doing a better job of getting rid of the the blight on Trail Creek (Blocksom, Ice House and Weber Sign). That is, short of hosing the taxpayers by overpaying (or paying anything, for that matter). Tell me how she would have avoided all the court time associated with eminent domain. We know you have some ax to grind with the Mayor, but your are starting to sound petty.

Posted by: JHeath Jan 22 2008, 11:16 AM

How quickly we forget what we've said in the past, MCStumper.
These are quotes from you regarding the North End plan that Joie presented during her campaign:

QUOTE
mcstumper Apr 10 2007, 06:38 PM | Post #3|

I like this plan. Library and City Hall relocation is a key element in restoring steady traffic flows on north Franklin St. and helping restore viability to the store fronts there. However, I have to question the timing. I think this is the wrong time to address this plan. We need to focus on acquiring the Blocksom property and then developing a plan for redeveloping the Trail Creek corridor that the community can get behind. One big project at a time, with succinctness and focus.


QUOTE
mcstumper Apr 11 2007, 07:55 PM

I think that 2-3 years is unrealistic. If the Blocksom negotiations are going as well as Michael B. indicates, I think that we need to focus our energy on that project and get it pushed through.

The library needs to be moved, but the million dollar question is "to where"? You think there is a lot of 'talk' about the Blocksom, Icehouse, Weber sign properties?! The public input process on where to locate the library and the design of the new building could take 2 1/2 years all by itself.


You seemed to have liked her ideas then...what changed for you?
By the way, she's not even part of the redevelopment commission anymore. She wasn't reappointed this year (or did you miss that when it happened a few months ago?) Leave her out of it.

Roger's post had more to do with private developers monopolizing the lakefront and restricting public access than anything else.

Posted by: edgeywood Jan 22 2008, 03:05 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 18 2008, 10:43 PM) *

I agree with most of your post. The part I disagree with is that the triangle is part of it. When Sheila was on the committee selecting the company to receive the license here, she chose Blue Chip and its upstream location. Solely to create the Golden Triangle. The other two firms were offering between 15 and 20 million more per year through the agreement of suitability. Just having the Golden Triangle would revitalize downtown MC by itself. Never happened. When other Cities with boats are getting 5-8% of the adjusted gross revenue, we are getting a whopping .6%



The fact is that 2 legs of the Golden Triangle are not designed to revitalize anything. The Outlet Mall and the boat are designed to keep people confined to those areas. As an "economic engine", casinos and boats have failed to revitalize any area. Sure the Boat brings in $$$ but at what cost to the community at large?

Same deal with the Outlet Mall, it really did little for the immediate neighborhood.

The library didn't kill the North End...the Marquette Mall and the South End did that. The scenario of the malls killing off the downtowns played out all over the country. So lets look at the some nearby communities that made the same mistake and have managed to correct it...Chicago and Oak Park both have vibrant downtowns after a pedestrian mall fiasco.

We have great transportation from the North End to Chicago. OK, it takes 1.5 hours, but lots of people are commuting that long from Naperville, Lemont, Racine, etc... to Chicago and they are paying premium prices for their homes in those suburbs. Why doesn't someone market Michigan City to those people?

Meanwhile, the Mayor is bound and determined to move the South Shore from the North End. Proximity to a commuter train is a huge asset for any neighborhood, but MC seems determined to squander yet another opportunity.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 22 2008, 03:13 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=72&ArticleID=8978&TM=77823.13

QUOTE
North End Studies
The Latest Study Report Now Issued

Editorial

Now that Andrews University has made its final presentation to the city, what's next?

Will this become merely the latest study done in the city in the past two decades to sit on a shelf and collect dust, or is this a study the city will actually put to use?

If the framework laid out by Mayor Chuck Oberlie in his State of the City address on Jan. 2 is any indication, some of the proposals brought up in the Andrews University study, as well as studies by consulting firms Lohan Anderson and JJR Inc., are being put in place.

Taken together, the three studies present a vision that would transform Michigan City. Some of the changes proposed make some residents nervous because the changes call for nothing less than a completely different downtown and North End. Frankly, that's not a bad idea because the North End as it stand now isn't working.

"Everything we've done here is a proposal that has to be taken to the next level," said Andrew Von Maur, the head of the design studio at Andrews University. "It's not a 100-percent blueprint to follow, but it shows how development should work."

Among the key proposals recommended in the Andrews study is making the downtown more pedestrian friendly by opening Franklin Street to two-way traffic and developing land along Trail Creek so that it becomes a pedestrian destination.

Both ideas were prominent in Oberlie's State of the City address. The mayor presented 21 key points in his address to develop the North End, and virtually all of the ideas came from one of the studies that were conducted in the city last year.

Will all of the ideas put forth in the studies be implemented?

Probably not. But there are enough ideas to result in major changes in the city that will encourage development and show to the rest of the state, region and nation that Michigan City is a community that's looking to the future and is the kind of place that's interested in new business. And when that happens, the city will also become a place where people want to live.

The Issue: Recent studies present a vision for redeveloping the city's North End.

Our Opinion: Mayor Chuck Oberlie has outlined a timeline for actual redevelopment, which could transform the city into the kind of place business seeks and where people want to live.

Posted by: Dave Jan 22 2008, 08:31 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jan 22 2008, 03:13 PM) *

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=72&ArticleID=8978&TM=77823.13

I wonder if there is a greater than zero chance of Oberlie actually reading the Lohan Anderson plan or the Andrews University plan and realizing that one of the key elements for North End redevelopment is having the South Shore here.

Probably not. Why TF do these people insist on spending so goddamn much money on plans they don't intend to implement?

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jan 22 2008, 10:46 PM

I would rather everyone waited until Oberlie was gone from office and any position of influence. He has been involved in too much for too long, and now he sounds like he is pushing stuff that these readers know I am four-square against. Sheesh! What will it take to keep them from messing stuff up even more?

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 22 2008, 10:52 PM

QUOTE(JHeath @ Jan 22 2008, 11:16 AM) *

You seemed to have liked her ideas then...what changed for you?
By the way, she's not even part of the redevelopment commission anymore. She wasn't reappointed this year (or did you miss that when it happened a few months ago?) Leave her out of it.

Roger's post had more to do with private developers monopolizing the lakefront and restricting public access than anything else.


I see no reason to leave her out of it. She was Chuck's opponent. Rog's post had nothing to do with private developers, but was a rant against the Mayor for not being able to get the creekside slums cleaned up. Since we are all "fools" for re-electing him, he seems to be indicating that a Winski administration would have been smart enough to have gotten all of this taken care of by now. I would like a few specifics on how that would get accomplished so quickly.

As far as what changed my mind... nothing. The library needs to be moved. However, on our list of things to do, it ranks right behind moving the State Prison to Westville and moving the NIPSCO plant to the shores of Pine Lake.

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 22 2008, 11:08 PM

QUOTE(edgeywood @ Jan 22 2008, 03:05 PM) *

Why doesn't someone market Michigan City to those people?

Meanwhile, the Mayor is bound and determined to move the South Shore from the North End. Proximity to a commuter train is a huge asset for any neighborhood, but MC seems determined to squander yet another opportunity.


Advertising to outsiders is to invite change. But whether they are advertised to or not, they will come. At my church this weekend, I was introduced to a younger couple from the Northside of Chicago that bought a house here (in the City proper) in the last year. For the time being they spend every other weekend here. Their intention is to eventually give up the Chicago life, move out here and commute. He said repeatedly how much they love it here and how well the commute times compare to the west and northwest suburbs. He told a client of his in passing how much he liked it, and out of the blue he runs into her at a store in town, only to find out that she had looked into it and bought a place of her own here...

As for the SS relocation, remember that accessibility is really a combination of physical proximity and parking availability. How much prime real estate are we going to sacrifice to not only build an elevated railway, but to also build the parking lots necessary for all the commuters. The drive from Elston Grove to Al's (which I imagine is very close to where a relocated train station would be), can't be more than 3 minutes.

Posted by: JHeath Jan 22 2008, 11:22 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 22 2008, 10:52 PM) *

I see no reason to leave her out of it. She was Chuck's opponent. Rog's post had nothing to do with private developers, but was a rant against the Mayor for not being able to get the creekside slums cleaned up. Since we are all "fools" for re-electing him, he seems to be indicating that a Winski administration would have been smart enough to have gotten all of this taken care of by now. I would like a few specifics on how that would get accomplished so quickly.

As far as what changed my mind... nothing. The library needs to be moved. However, on our list of things to do, it ranks right behind moving the State Prison to Westville and moving the NIPSCO plant to the shores of Pine Lake.

Yes, she was one of two of his opponents. But you haven't mentions Jim Larocco anywhere in this...
and if you'd read Roger's other posts you'd realize that his major beef is actually about the shrinking public access to the waterfront. But, if you really want to know what Joie would do differently, call and ask her. I'm sure she'd be glad to share her ideas with you.

Enough said. Let's focus on the topic now.


Posted by: Dave Jan 23 2008, 12:30 AM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 22 2008, 11:08 PM) *

....
As for the SS relocation, remember that accessibility is really a combination of physical proximity and parking availability. How much prime real estate are we going to sacrifice to not only build an elevated railway, but to also build the parking lots necessary for all the commuters. The drive from Elston Grove to Al's (which I imagine is very close to where a relocated train station would be), can't be more than 3 minutes.

Elevated railway? Like the El in Chicago? Who is proposing anything like that for the SS?

As for the drive being three minutes, well, for one thing that works both ways. The Andrews U. plan proposes showcasing the SS station on 11th., and includes parking. As for sacrificing prime real estate, it doesn't seem to be very prime at the moment. It will hopefully be prime in the future, but it need to be revitalized first. And I think moving the SS away from the north end is a major step in the wrong direction towards acheiving that goal.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 23 2008, 06:09 AM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 22 2008, 10:52 PM) *

I see no reason to leave her out of it. She was Chuck's opponent. Rog's post had nothing to do with private developers, but was a rant against the Mayor for not being able to get the creekside slums cleaned up. Since we are all "fools" for re-electing him, he seems to be indicating that a Winski administration would have been smart enough to have gotten all of this taken care of by now. I would like a few specifics on how that would get accomplished so quickly.

As far as what changed my mind... nothing. The library needs to be moved. However, on our list of things to do, it ranks right behind moving the State Prison to Westville and moving the NIPSCO plant to the shores of Pine Lake.

As far as I know, none of us here at CBTL is Joie Winski. Asking us what she would do is kind of silly, it would be made up and none factual. She is pretty easy to get a hold of, call her and ask her about the Creek area. What we do know about is her stand on Franklin St. At City hall during the St. Andrews plan presentation, this was revealed but for some reason kept out of the press. "All of the experts we consulted say the success of North End revitalization calls for relocating the LIBRARY" that would put it at the top of the list, not somewhere behind ridding Michigan City of its single largest employer.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 23 2008, 06:37 AM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 22 2008, 11:08 PM) *

Advertising to outsiders is to invite change. But whether they are advertised to or not, they will come. At my church this weekend, I was introduced to a younger couple from the Northside of Chicago that bought a house here (in the City proper) in the last year. For the time being they spend every other weekend here. Their intention is to eventually give up the Chicago life, move out here and commute. He said repeatedly how much they love it here and how well the commute times compare to the west and northwest suburbs. He told a client of his in passing how much he liked it, and out of the blue he runs into her at a store in town, only to find out that she had looked into it and bought a place of her own here...

Please don't come up with an opinion soley on two people moving into your Parish. Michigan City has had a populaltion decline for over thirty years. Expert projections are not very promising for the next ten either. Very bleak actualy when compared to Lake and Porter.

Population projections from the Indiana Business Research Center indicate that, by 2020, the Michigan City–La Porte metro will grow 2.3 percent (about 2,500 people) from current levels. This is significantly slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 8.1 percent. The area is expected to have about 5,000 more senior citizens than it did in Census 2000. The growth rate of 34.1 percent for those 65 and older is slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 40.6 percent. However, the metro has a slightly older population to begin with and by 2020, nearly 18 percent of the population will be in the upper age group.

Updated growth projections released Friday for Lake and Porter counties show a 239 percent increase over a prior population forecast, according to a South Shore Railroad consultant.


Posted by: CaddyRich Jan 23 2008, 07:20 AM

Having lived in the vicinity of 11th Street many years ago, I think having the tracks there is still a hindrance to development...seriously - would you want to walk out your front door and see this big train going by? There was a coal run that would go through around 11:00 PM shaking the windows - and I was 2 houses away from 11th.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 23 2008, 07:56 AM

The reason that the Golden Triangle has failed to this point is that the City has done nothing to help it grow.

Think of MC this way. We are a major college basketball program in a power confrence. The problem is we have been down for a long time, while other programs have had good winning histories recently. People aren't going to go here easily, they need to be convinced. They will go to the other schools because of their reputations for winning. We as a City need to really work at building up our assets and working hard on recruiting, neither of which we have really done so far. We just kind of expected people to just show up, because. It doesn't work that way. We need something to get people excited about here, and to make them feel we are on the upswing. Back to the example, we need to hit the recruiting trail, and hit it hard.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 23 2008, 03:10 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=9041

QUOTE
City Embraces Redevelopment Plans
Plan Commission OKs proposal that can be used in concert with university study.

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - When they decide it's time to begin North End redevelopment efforts in earnest, Michigan City officials are going to have their hands full.

The city's Plan Commission approved a redevelopment plan Tuesday submitted by the Chicago design firm Lohan Anderson. It is the second presented in less than a week to city officials which deals, at least in part, with redeveloping the Trail Creek corridor between U.S. 12 and Eighth Street.

Late last week, the Andrews University Urban Design Studio presented its North End redevelopment plan, which had been in the works since last summer.

Tuesday's presentation described everything from a bustling creekside community to an aerial tramway leading from near Blue Chip Casino to Washington Park beach.

The most prominent aspect of the plan is the recommendation that three 24-story high-rise buildings be built along the creek amid a mixture of residential and retail areas.

"This is simply a concept plan," Lohan Anderson Director of Planning Joel Stauber said Tuesday. "It would give the city more control over development of that 50 acres. It's not a final master plan. It establishes a framework for development and allows the city to establish up front where it stands on development."

Fourth-Ward Michigan City Councilwoman Pat Boy said Tuesday the Lohan Anderson study and the more in-depth Andrews study could compliment each other if officials choose to use both in planning changes.

"I think it's a good idea," she said. "It's an enormous plan. As a concept, I like it, the overall plan I think is good. The two will work together pretty well."

Redevelopment Comm-ission Attorney Michael Bergerson said the Lohan plan could come together fairly easily because the area in question is in a Tax Increment Financing district.

Money from tax revenues of other businesses in the district is available for the addition and improvement of infrastructure in the area.

The City Council now will get a look at the study, and if it passes the plan, it will go back to the redevelopment commission.

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 23 2008, 07:17 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 23 2008, 12:30 AM) *

Elevated railway? Like the El in Chicago? Who is proposing anything like that for the SS?

As for the drive being three minutes, well, for one thing that works both ways. The Andrews U. plan proposes showcasing the SS station on 11th., and includes parking. As for sacrificing prime real estate, it doesn't seem to be very prime at the moment. It will hopefully be prime in the future, but it need to be revitalized first. And I think moving the SS away from the north end is a major step in the wrong direction towards acheiving that goal.


I think we are talking about two different things here. There is an existing post that goes over this ad nauseum. There are three proposals on the table for the South Shore, as I understand it. Move it north along Trail Creek which would require an elevated track to clear Trail Creek since the existing swing bridge wouldn't work for an electrified railway. 2. Move it south along the CSX tracks by Ames Field. 3. Leave it alone.

Like I said, find the post and you can see everyone's opinions on the subject in detail...

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 23 2008, 07:23 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 23 2008, 06:37 AM) *

Please don't come up with an opinion soley on two people moving into your Parish. Michigan City has had a populaltion decline for over thirty years. Expert projections are not very promising for the next ten either. Very bleak actualy when compared to Lake and Porter.

Population projections from the Indiana Business Research Center indicate that, by 2020, the Michigan City–La Porte metro will grow 2.3 percent (about 2,500 people) from current levels. This is significantly slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 8.1 percent. The area is expected to have about 5,000 more senior citizens than it did in Census 2000. The growth rate of 34.1 percent for those 65 and older is slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 40.6 percent. However, the metro has a slightly older population to begin with and by 2020, nearly 18 percent of the population will be in the upper age group.

Updated growth projections released Friday for Lake and Porter counties show a 239 percent increase over a prior population forecast, according to a South Shore Railroad consultant.


You are right. I think we tend to create opinions based on what we see right in front of us. Besides what I have seen in church, three very close neighbors are all people who moved here from Chicago.

I wonder if the forecasters actually predicted the rapid redevelopment and growth in those Chicago neighborhoods south of Loop, or did they need to go back and adjust numbers once the trend began?

Posted by: mcstumper Jan 23 2008, 07:30 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jan 23 2008, 07:56 AM) *

The reason that the Golden Triangle has failed to this point is that the City has done nothing to help it grow.

Think of MC this way. We are a major college basketball program in a power confrence. The problem is we have been down for a long time, while other programs have had good winning histories recently. People aren't going to go here easily, they need to be convinced. They will go to the other schools because of their reputations for winning. We as a City need to really work at building up our assets and working hard on recruiting, neither of which we have really done so far. We just kind of expected people to just show up, because. It doesn't work that way. We need something to get people excited about here, and to make them feel we are on the upswing. Back to the example, we need to hit the recruiting trail, and hit it hard.


I'm not sure whether I agree with this statement or not. The lack of private development is the problem. Nobody seems to want to make the first commitment. Whether it's the Warren Building, the old St. John's church or the Eagle Building. Everyone is sitting and waiting for that sign from above. Does government really need to spearhead this, or should an association of private, interested parties be actively recruiting investors with more guts.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 23 2008, 08:13 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 23 2008, 07:30 PM) *

I'm not sure whether I agree with this statement or not. The lack of private development is the problem. Nobody seems to want to make the first commitment. Whether it's the Warren Building, the old St. John's church or the Eagle Building. Everyone is sitting and waiting for that sign from above. Does government really need to spearhead this, or should an association of private, interested parties be actively recruiting investors with more guts.

Let's look at a triangle, three legs, three angles, all connected. In the case of our GOLDEN TRIANGLE their is quite a bit missing. There are no legs or angles connecting it. Realistically they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Hell, they have no connection to each other what so ever, there is no easy clear cut path for a visitor to go from one of these attractions to another. Out of town visitors having one of them as their primary destinations have a difficult time finding it. We really need to rid ourselves of the Franklin Street turn-around. Somebody please move the LIBRARY.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 24 2008, 07:20 AM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jan 23 2008, 07:30 PM) *

I'm not sure whether I agree with this statement or not. The lack of private development is the problem. Nobody seems to want to make the first commitment. Whether it's the Warren Building, the old St. John's church or the Eagle Building. Everyone is sitting and waiting for that sign from above. Does government really need to spearhead this, or should an association of private, interested parties be actively recruiting investors with more guts.


You have to remember, we aren't talking about a primo locale when compared to our neighbors. Why would people want to be the first to make a commitment when they could slide into a much more established and reliable community like Chesterton, Valpo, New Buffalo, etc. We don't have the luxuries that they have, so we have to be more aggressive in selling ourselves. People want to know that Michigan City is serious about fixing itself before they are going to be serious about moving/building/opening here. Outsiders, who are going to be the big push here, don't have our level of civic pride, and they have no reason to. Until they live here and acclimate, they won't. They are looking at MC like they would any other town. MC's leadership needs to step into this vacuum and sell this City.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 24 2008, 03:08 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=72&ArticleID=9062&TM=57991.57

QUOTE
Eminent Domain
City Goes To Court To Seize Two Parcels

Editorial

It is unfortunate that Michigan City is using eminent domain to acquire two pieces or property along the Trail Creek corridor. The Redevelopment Commission, through its attorney, Michael Bergerson, filed the eminent domain petition in Superior Court 3 last week to acquire Weber Sign Co. and the Ice House, a vacant building owned by Thomas and Florence Sobkowiak.

Eminent domain is when a government seizes property that belongs to someone else. Although the government is required to pay for the property, when it involves an ongoing business like Weber Sign Co., the value of the business can vary dramatically. That is what has happened.

Because of contamination underneath those properties - contamination that is no fault of either property owner - once the city acquires the land it will have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to clean it up. As a result, Michigan City offered Weber Sign $1 for the property and $175,000 as a "relocation fee."

Eminent domain is always controversial. Because it is a lethal weapon that government can use, it should only be used as a last resort. Because negotiations have been going on for about five years to acquire the land, the city obviously feels it has reached the end of the line.

What makes it difficult is that it could put a viable company out of business, or at the least force it to move. Neither is acceptable to the owners of Weber Sign. Kathy Weber said the city's offer simply isn't enough for it to equip a new building to suit its needs and move.

There is a desperate need for the city to improve the Trail Creek corridor and Mayor Chuck Oberlie has promised to make that and North End development priorities of the city this year.

The unfortunate fact is that to accomplish that, the owners of two pieces of property have been told by the city they have no choice but to sell, whether they like the offer or not.

Our Opinion
The Issue: The Redevelopment Commission is seeking a court order to acquire Weber Sign Co. and the "ice house."

Our Opinion: It is unfortunate that eminent domain is being resorted to. It always should be a last resort, but when the sides can't agree, only a court can set the amount of compensation

Posted by: Dave Jan 26 2008, 08:26 PM

I have to say I have philosophical problems with using eminent domain to effectively take property away from one private party and give it to another. I'm all for north end redevelopment, as you all know, but this kind of use of government power really bothers me. Roads and other such public works are one thing, but taking property so developers can build on it is something else.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 26 2008, 10:45 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 26 2008, 08:26 PM) *

I have to say I have philosophical problems with using eminent domain to effectively take property away from one private party and give it to another. I'm all for north end redevelopment, as you all know, but this kind of use of government power really bothers me. Roads and other such public works are one thing, but taking property so developers can build on it is something else.

Michael Bergerson running for Judge with his known stand on the issue is scary.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 27 2008, 07:57 AM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 26 2008, 10:45 PM) *

Michael Bergerson running for Judge with his known stand on the issue is scary.


If he is for Eminent Domain on this issue, I won't vote for him.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 27 2008, 08:45 AM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jan 27 2008, 07:57 AM) *

If he is for Eminent Domain on this issue, I won't vote for him.

He is the lawyer for the Redevelopment Commision. The one that as rumor has it was trying to buy these worthless property's privately before going after them through the commision. I think he needs to address this issue and if he was trying, he needs to recuse himself from the whole procedure.

Posted by: mox1981 Jan 27 2008, 02:19 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 27 2008, 08:45 AM) *

He is the lawyer for the Redevelopment Commision. The one that as rumor has it was trying to buy these worthless property's privately before going after them through the commision. I think he needs to address this issue and if he was trying, he needs to recuse himself from the whole procedure.


You might want to get the facts straight before passing along malicious lies (under the guise of a rumor) that not only questions someone's integrity but accuses them of a criminal act.

The last time I checked, Bergerson did not have a vote on the Redevelopment Commission, the Planning Commission, or the City Council; these Boards unamimously or overwhelming approved the acquisition of this real estate.

If you want facts, they're public record...this property was included in the redevelopment area by at least 1997 and probably much, much earlier. Further, in the past two weeks, both Andrews University and Lohan Anderson independently presented their vision for the "golden triangle," and both recommended the acquisition and redevelopment of this real estate. The last time I checked, Bergerson had no financial interest in either.

Spreading false and malicious rumors is offensive and an insult to our intelligence. If you have any interest in the truth, just call Bergerson...like I did.

P.S. Anyway, I thought that the Webers said that they now want to sell, but want the City (you and me) to pick up the tab for their mess.

Posted by: Dave Jan 27 2008, 05:37 PM

QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 27 2008, 02:19 PM) *

The last time I checked, Bergerson did not have a vote on the Redevelopment Commission, the Planning Commission, or the City Council; these Boards unamimously or overwhelming approved the acquisition of this real estate.


I checked. You're right. As attorney for the Redevelopment Commission, he doesn't actually have a vote, though one would be silly to think that he isn't in a position of influence. If he were to have any kind of financial interest, ethically the least he would be expected to do would be to disclose that interest.

QUOTE
Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct

Rule 1.7. Conflict of Interest: Current Clients

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if:

(1) the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or

(2) there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the lawyer.

(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest under paragraph (a), a lawyer may represent a client if:

(1) the lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;

(2) the representation is not prohibited by law;

(3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal; and

(4) each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.


Now, I'm against spreading gossip and rumors as much as, if not more so, than the next person, but I'm not going to fly off the handle about it, calling people liars and the like, because I didn't know of the rumor before I read it here, and I don't have personal knowledge regarding the truth or falsity of the claim. Heck, I can imagine a scenario where Mr. Bergerson was acting as council for the RC and looking into acquisition of the property in question, and that could easily have been misinterpreted as something it wasn't (pure speculation here, of course).

On the other hand, if it turns out that anyone related to the Redevelopment Commission was doing anything like buying property effected by their official actions, I would be gung ho on getting them prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. As an exercise for my own personal edification, I may have to determine whether such a prosecution would be done on a state or a federal level.

As for the Webers being interested in selling their property, heck, they're running a business. If I offered NIPSCO a $1 trillion for their lakefront generating station, I betcha they'd sell it to me, but if I offered them $1 they wouldn't even answer my mail. The Webers own a piece of real estate which appears to have substantial money value, and they seem to want fair compensation for it. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with using the power of government to take the property away from them to give it to someone else who gets to make a boatload of money on it.

Nice first post, mox1981. This is a good place for discussions and opinions.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jan 28 2008, 08:14 AM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jan 27 2008, 05:37 PM) *

Nice first post, mox1981. This is a good place for discussions and opinions.


I wanted to add on to this a little bit. My favorite thing about this place is that it is open, and is completely determined by the people who want to share here. Every other piece of media in Michigan City is controlled to some extent. The News Dispatch publishes what it wants to publish. WIMS puts on air whom ever it wants to put on the air. Even the cable access TV shows like News and Views or Its Time to Blow the Whistle have control over who talks on their shows. When it comes to this place, anyone who has access to a computer can register and post. Anyone else who posts here has just as much of a voice as me, who owns this place. The thing about that kind of freedom is that things will get said that are wrong, offend people, or more. In cases where information is wrong, all that needs to be said is what is wrong, and what is true. The only thing I really ask for is civility in responding. We are a pretty easy going and open-minded bunch. Welcome to the board, and I hope to see you around more often.

Posted by: lovethiscity Jan 28 2008, 09:37 PM

QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 27 2008, 02:19 PM) *

You might want to get the facts straight before passing along malicious lies (under the guise of a rumor) that not only questions someone's integrity but accuses them of a criminal act.

The last time I checked, Bergerson did not have a vote on the Redevelopment Commission, the Planning Commission, or the City Council; these Boards unamimously or overwhelming approved the acquisition of this real estate.

If you want facts, they're public record...this property was included in the redevelopment area by at least 1997 and probably much, much earlier. Further, in the past two weeks, both Andrews University and Lohan Anderson independently presented their vision for the "golden triangle," and both recommended the acquisition and redevelopment of this real estate. The last time I checked, Bergerson had no financial interest in either.

Spreading false and malicious rumors is offensive and an insult to our intelligence. If you have any interest in the truth, just call Bergerson...like I did.

P.S. Anyway, I thought that the Webers said that they now want to sell, but want the City (you and me) to pick up the tab for their mess.

The one that as rumor has it was trying to buy these worthless property's privately. So this is not true? You avoided this. I hope it is not true I would hope has has more integrety than that. As for the Weber mess, the paper said it was not caused by them. That would be like saying the pollution in the ground at the Trail Creek Marina was caused by Michigan City, and if it was caused by Michigan City did it leach onto the Weber property?

Posted by: mox1981 Jan 29 2008, 01:25 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Jan 28 2008, 09:37 PM) *

The one that as rumor has it was trying to buy these worthless property's privately. So this is not true? You avoided this. I hope it is not true I would hope has has more integrety than that. As for the Weber mess, the paper said it was not caused by them. That would be like saying the pollution in the ground at the Trail Creek Marina was caused by Michigan City, and if it was caused by Michigan City did it leach onto the Weber property?


I think Bergerson himself would be in the best position to clear up any questions...I obviously have no inside information here.

The reason for my post is to try to understand what the point is here...if an unsubstantiated claim is put out about someone whose record is clean, is the onus of proof on the person making the claim or the person accused? The bottom line is - are you making a claim or floating rumors to see what sticks? I'd be interested to hear about the source of such information.

I'm not sure how the trail creek analogy relates to this issue. In reality, the Webers' property does not sit along the banks of Trail Creek. Not only is the property not "waterfront", but it appears to be at an elevation higher than Trail Creek. In light of the fact that water flows downhill, not even the Webers are making the claim that their property was contaminated by Trail Creek. Of course the Webers, in their own interest, will find people to blame (the city, the attorney, former property owners, etc.), but if they purchased the property without doing due diligence as to its environmental health, their property value may eventually suffer, whether they caused the contamination or not.

Meanwhile, the reality is that the pollution continues to pose a threat to the water quality of Trail Creek.

I appreciate the words of welcome to the board...I'm glad I found this great outlet for local issues!

Posted by: Dave Jan 29 2008, 02:37 PM

QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 29 2008, 01:25 PM) *

I think Bergerson himself would be in the best position to clear up any questions...I obviously have no inside information here.

Bergerson or the owners of the properties in question would have the answers...are any Webers members of CBTL?
QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 29 2008, 01:25 PM) *

The reason for my post is to try to understand what the point is here...if an unsubstantiated claim is put out about someone whose record is clean, is the onus of proof on the person making the claim or the person accused? The bottom line is - are you making a claim or floating rumors to see what sticks? I'd be interested to hear about the source of such information.

Obviously the burden of proof is on whoever makes any claim. Some matters, which are readily apparent to our senses ("On a sunny day, the sky is blue"), require the proponent to present little proof. On the other hand. as Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence ("I was abducted by space aliens"). I've heard rumors that "they" (you know, the "them" who no one is ever really able to identify--whenever I hear "they want to do 'x'," my first response is always, "Who are "they"?) want to bulldoze everything north of 11th street and put in high rise low income housing, like the late and unlamented Cabrini Green complex in Chicago. My response to this idea has always been to laugh out loud.

I would agree with moxie that Bergerson has no obligation to respond to unsubstantiated rumors. If anyone presented evidence that the rumors were based on fact, however, I'd expect an explanation.

QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 29 2008, 01:25 PM) *

I'm not sure how the trail creek analogy relates to this issue. In reality, the Webers' property does not sit along the banks of Trail Creek. Not only is the property not "waterfront", but it appears to be at an elevation higher than Trail Creek. In light of the fact that water flows downhill, not even the Webers are making the claim that their property was contaminated by Trail Creek. Of course the Webers, in their own interest, will find people to blame (the city, the attorney, former property owners, etc.), but if they purchased the property without doing due diligence as to its environmental health, their property value may eventually suffer, whether they caused the contamination or not.

Meanwhile, the reality is that the pollution continues to pose a threat to the water quality of Trail Creek.
(bolding mine)
When did the Webers buy the property? The business has been running for what, 25 years? Before Love Canal, did anyone even think about what kind of chemical gunk "buried treasures" previous real estate owners left behind when they sold? I guess what I'm saying is, how much "due diligence" was due when the Webers bought the property?
QUOTE(mox1981 @ Jan 29 2008, 01:25 PM) *

I appreciate the words of welcome to the board...I'm glad I found this great outlet for local issues!


Welcome aboard!

Posted by: Dave Jan 29 2008, 03:00 PM

Here's a link to my last post in a related thread, "South spur cost going up" ---

http://www.citybythelake.org/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=1075&view=findpost&p=7348

Posted by: Dave Feb 2 2008, 02:58 PM

I'm not sure where the N-D got the title for this, but I agree with the title....

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=118&ArticleID=9407&TM=57378.76

QUOTE

Saturday, February 02, 2008

South Shore Tracks Should Stay On 11th

Richard Murphy

Saturday, February 02, 2008


In recent newspaper articles, NICTD has indicated they'd like to move the South Shore tracks that run through Michigan City's downtown.

Some residents have expressed concerns about the South Shore tracks being rerouted out of Michigan City's downtown and the impact this will have on our city's long-term economic growth potential.

In the recent Andrews University charette, urban designers, architects and transportation consultants, many with national reputations, agreed with the following thesis:

Keeping the rails in the North End of Michigan City by improving them where they are or by moving them north will provide a powerful engine of economic growth; whereas very little economic benefits would accrue by moving the rails to the south.

The support for this thesis is that keeping the rails in the heart of our downtown, walking distance from the downtown neighborhoods and the lake, would allow for a powerful growth phenomenon called Transit Oriented Development to occur. This is a concept that NICTD itself promotes.

A transit-oriented development (TOD) is a mixed-use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transport, and often incorporates features to encourage transit ridership. A TOD neighborhood typically has a center with a train station surrounded by relatively high-density development with progressively lower-density development spreading outward from the center. TODs generally are located within a radius of one-quarter to one-half mile from a transit stop, as this is considered to be an appropriate scale for pedestrians.

Transit-oriented development (TOD) embraces the vision for the North End that has been put forth with the Andrews University North End plan, the Lohan Anderson plan, and the Elston Grove Streetscape plan.

TOD growth doesn't just happen. It must be coordinated and targeted toward potential buyers and developers in the North End. Once we confirm where our train station will be located for the long term, we possess a powerful marketing strategy to bring development to the North End.

I have done extensive research on this issue and would like to offer some facts:

1. NICTD has indicated it has a preference for the option of moving the tracks to the south along Ames Field, a move that benefits NICTD from a cost and operational standpoint.

2. With regard to any relocation of the South Shore tracks, NO decision has been made by the administration of Michigan City.

3. With regard to any relocation or improvements of the South Shore tracks, discussions have just begun to take place within the community.

4. Indiana State Rep. Scott Pelath has recently proposed a funding bill for improvements of the South Shore tracks. These funds could be used for relocation of the tracks to the north or to the south or to improve the existing 11th corridor. The language of the bill remains quite general, and open to all possibilities.

5. There has been no analysis to date performed on how a relocation or improvement of the South Shore tracks would impact Michigan City's economy.

I understand that we must allow NICTD to operate as a viable commuter rail and that there are challenges to its current operations through MIchigan City. The South Shore is a tremendous asset to our community. We need to work with NICTD to overcome these challenges.

But it is important that NICTD and Michigan City residents understand that the North End of Michigan has been identified as one of the most exciting redevelopment opportunities in the United States. The reason for this is the large amount of affordable undeveloped land and intact historic housing stock so close to Lake Michigan and in close proximity to Chicago. In essence, Chicago is virtually walking distance from neighborhoods of the North End of Michigan City by virtue of a commuter railroad running through our downtown.

The dramatic changes we foresee in the North End over the long term are changes that can transform Michigan City and bring more jobs, a larger tax base, and a higher quality of life.

Hence, we have two goals, one a viable commuter railroad, the other a tremendous redevelopment opportunity that could bring prosperity to Michigan City. Surely we can find a compromise where both goals can be realized.

q

Richard Murphy is First Ward councilman in Michigan City.




Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 4 2008, 08:05 AM

Chuck Oberlie weighs in...

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=9450&TM=32755.26

QUOTE
One Way Toward Two Way

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Mayor Chuck Oberlie's vision for the city's North End is full of drastic changes and proposals that could change the face of Michigan City.

Proposing high-rise buildings on Trail Creek and changing traffic patterns on some of the city's most-traveled thoroughfares, Oberlie's North End plan does what many hoped it would. It makes people talk about the North End in more than just nebulous tones.

"Opinions are always good. We have to weigh a lot of different things when we're thinking about a project like this and it's not something we're just talking about anymore," City Planner John Pugh said. "You get divergent opinions, too, which is always interesting."

One of the major points of Oberlie's vision is changing traffic and parking patterns on Franklin Street. That idea came about, in part, due to studies by the Andrews University Urban Design Studio and the Chicago design firm Lohan Anderson.

Oberlie said in his State of the City address earlier this month that he plans to look closely at turning the northern-most blocks of Franklin Street from one-way to two-way driving.

He also will look into changing parking from diagonal to parallel.

Pugh said plans for Franklin Street are solid and that the city hopes to begin moving on them by the summer.

"Right now the city engineer is putting together a rough sketch showing how this could be done (based on original drawings from 1989 when the street first went one-way)," Pugh said. "Then we'll take the drawings to a contractor and get an estimated cost. It's not a matter of whether we can do it or not, it's a question of finances. The project wouldn't be a problem. We just need to know we can afford it."

Pugh said he hopes to take a plan to the Mainstreet Association by March.

The Franklin Street plan is aimed at making the downtown district more pedestrian and driver friendly. It's a step - officials feel - toward revitalizing downtown by attracting residents and businesses.

It also has been one of the more contested issues in Oberlie's plan. The division can be seen in Automated Data Systems Inc., a small computer business at 618 Franklin St.

"I see people who think it's two-way, anyway. I'm always waiting for the crunch from someone driving down the street the wrong way," said Cheryl McCay, a receptionist at the business. "I'd definitely be open to changing it. We might get more parking and I'd like to see more people walking down here. I could use the company."

Brian Shaffer, a computer tech who sits 15 feet from McCay in the small office, says making Franklin Street two-way would be a disaster.

"You'd see a bunch of accidents. I'll guarantee it," Shaffer said. "People don't even stop at the stop signs now. I just don't think it would be wise to confuse people even more."

Pugh said if the money is there, the project itself would be relatively simple to finish.

Contact Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: JHeath Feb 4 2008, 09:55 AM

QUOTE
Oberlie said in his State of the City address earlier this month that he plans to look closely at turning the northern-most blocks of Franklin Street from one-way to two-way driving


Hmm...that sounds vaguely familiar. Now, where have I seen THIS idea before? huh.gif

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 4 2008, 09:59 AM

QUOTE(JHeath @ Feb 4 2008, 09:55 AM) *

Hmm...that sounds vaguely familiar. Now, where have I seen THIS idea before? huh.gif


I was thinking the samething. I wonder how long it will be until he moves the library? laugh.gif

Posted by: Ang Feb 4 2008, 10:09 AM

That's nice that he takes his opponents campaign ideas and uses them to improve his own image.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 13 2008, 07:12 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=9783

QUOTE
Changing Parking Downtown?

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - If traffic on Franklin Street is changed to two-way, the current diagonal parking configuration would have to be changed to avoid an expensive and time-consuming widening of the street.

The Michigan City Redevelopment Commission on Monday agreed to hire an engineering firm to study the move, and present a design for the two-way plan.

Part of that design will include a new parking configuration which would likely create diagonal parking on one side of the street and parallel parking on the other, or parallel parking on both sides.

If the city goes with parallel parking on both sides of the street, though, the move would likely reduce parking spaces downtown by half.

"We're looking at diagonal on one side and parallel on the other," Mayor Chuck Oberlie said Monday. "There is an issue of how much parking there will be if we go two-way."

City engineer Bill Phelps said Monday Franklin Street between Fourth and Ninth streets is 57 feet, 6 inches wide, including parking spaces. Angled spots are nearly 19 feet of that on each side, which leaves 10-foot lanes for traffic.

Twelve-foot lanes are recommended for 45-degree parking, Phelps said.

"The alternative is to put 45-degree on one side and 9-foot parallel on the other," Phelps said. "We can't get diagonal on two sides unless we widen the street, which is bad because we'd have to move poles and things."

Phelps said whatever work is done on Franklin Street will likely involve milling and paving work, as well as possibly some new curbing. Oberlie plans to give the present concept to the city's Mainstreet Association for its input.

The downtown group will be an equal partner in the project.



Contact reporter Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: Dave Feb 13 2008, 12:12 PM

Franklin Street currently has two lanes with angle parking on both sides. I suppose wider lanes would be prudent if the traffic in the lanes is going in opposite directions.

Posted by: mcstumper Feb 13 2008, 08:53 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Feb 13 2008, 12:12 PM) *

Franklin Street currently has two lanes with angle parking on both sides. I suppose wider lanes would be prudent if the traffic in the lanes is going in opposite directions.


Right. But widening the lanes while keeping angle parking would necessitate a complete overhaul - ripping out everything that is there and starting over with narrower sidewalks. If my math is right, doing what Bill is recommending would result in a loss of only 25% of the parking spaces while allowing the traffic lanes to be widened from 10 ft to almost 15ft. This, and it wouldn't require nearly as much reconstruction.

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 13 2008, 09:13 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Feb 13 2008, 08:53 PM) *

Right. But widening the lanes while keeping angle parking would necessitate a complete overhaul - ripping out everything that is there and starting over with narrower sidewalks. If my math is right, doing what Bill is recommending would result in a loss of only 25% of the parking spaces while allowing the traffic lanes to be widened from 10 ft to almost 15ft. This, and it wouldn't require nearly as much reconstruction.

Common sense makes me ask. With the library blocking the path to and from the lake, where are the vehicles going to come from to go north on Franklin at Fourth Street? It will for the most part remain a one way street. History shows us, that when Mr. Oberlie sets his mind to increasing traffic in an area (Franklin Square) it does not work out very well. On the other hand when he puts in the effort and lots of money to reduce traffic (South Franklin via a five lane highway through a corn field) it doe not work well either. I just hope if anything is done, it gets done right. By the way will somebody please move the library.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 14 2008, 07:24 AM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 13 2008, 09:13 PM) *

Common sense makes me ask. With the library blocking the path to and from the lake, where are the vehicles going to come from to go north on Franklin at Fourth Street? It will for the most part remain a one way street. History shows us, that when Mr. Oberlie sets his mind to increasing traffic in an area (Franklin Square) it does not work out very well. On the other hand when he puts in the effort and lots of money to reduce traffic (South Franklin via a five lane highway through a corn field) it doe not work well either. I just hope if anything is done, it gets done right. By the way will somebody please move the library.


Perfect post. No one is going to mess around with Franklin St, even as a two way street, when they can go over to Pine and get to whereever they want. If the library is there, there isn't much point.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 15 2008, 01:34 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=9874&TM=52604.78

QUOTE
Make Washington, Pine Two-Way, Too
Nice to see the city willing to make Franklin Street two-way like the Andrews University kids suggested. Now how about the rest of the plan? Do the same for Washington and Pine streets. It wouldn't cost much. After seeing how it works out for six months or so, add tree-lined medians and parkways to make them more pedestrian friendly. I'm not a city planner, just someone who's circled the block a few times trying to find my way home.

Tom Jachimiec

Michigan City

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 15 2008, 08:53 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Feb 15 2008, 01:34 PM) *

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=9874&TM=52604.78

If we are going to leave the Library where it is, let's change its name to something like "The Franklin Street Tuurn Around"

Posted by: mcstumper Feb 17 2008, 07:00 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 15 2008, 08:53 PM) *

If we are going to leave the Library where it is, let's change its name to something like "The Franklin Street Tuurn Around"


Don't forget that you are going to have to pay to move the News-Dispatch also.

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 17 2008, 09:32 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Feb 17 2008, 07:00 PM) *

Don't forget that you are going to have to pay to move the News-Dispatch also.

The road between City Hall and the News Dispatch is the oirginal Franklin St.
It is ugly but not in the way. A private developer would be in a hurry to get their hands on it. The News Dispatch would surely sell, as they do not need all the space since printing the paper has been outsourced

Posted by: mcstumper Feb 18 2008, 06:56 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 17 2008, 09:32 PM) *

The road between City Hall and the News Dispatch is the oirginal Franklin St.


If you look at a satellite view (Google maps), you will see that the building sits on what would have been the southbound lane of old Franklin St.

Posted by: kharris Feb 18 2008, 07:34 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Feb 18 2008, 06:56 PM) *

If you look at a satellite view (Google maps), you will see that the building sits on what would have been the southbound lane of old Franklin St.


Actually it sits right along side of the original Franklin Street. As a kid I delivered the paper and one saturday a month we had to go down and pay our bill. That was when Franklin went all the way to the lake and the building was the same at it is now. City Hall may sit on the north bound lane but but what appears to be the an alley now I believe to be the original south bound lane.

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 18 2008, 11:02 PM

QUOTE(kharris @ Feb 18 2008, 07:34 PM) *

Actually it sits right along side of the original Franklin Street. As a kid I delivered the paper and one saturday a month we had to go down and pay our bill. That was when Franklin went all the way to the lake and the building was the same at it is now. City Hall may sit on the north bound lane but but what appears to be the an alley now I believe to be the original south bound lane.

In other words, plenty of room to go through. But as it was pointed out by Mrs. Winski's plan, that property would be very valuable. The land city hall sits on could be sold for top dallar providing funding to relocate City Hall to an exsisting building or a new one. Hell a woman in the paper recently has a $100,000 house being taxed at $1,300,000 because of the land it sits on.

Posted by: Dave Feb 19 2008, 05:55 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 18 2008, 11:02 PM) *

In other words, plenty of room to go through. But as it was pointed out by Mrs. Winski's plan, that property would be very valuable. The land city hall sits on could be sold for top dallar providing funding to relocate City Hall to an exsisting building or a new one. Hell a woman in the paper recently has a $100,000 house being taxed at $1,300,000 because of the land it sits on.


Hey, I just had an idea as to how to use the Wal-Nart after they close it for the Super Wal-Nart....

Posted by: mcstumper Feb 19 2008, 08:21 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 18 2008, 11:02 PM) *

Hell a woman in the paper recently has a $100,000 house being taxed at $1,300,000 because of the land it sits on.


I am a charitable guy, so I will make a deal with her. I will pay the cost to have her house picked up and moved to the lot that my house sits on. I will have my house torn down and out of the way. Then she will only have to pay taxes on her $100k house and the $25k lot. Heck, I will even take that tax monster lot of hers off of her hands free of charge. Since all she cares about is being able to live in that house, she should jump at the opportunity, right?

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 19 2008, 10:51 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Feb 19 2008, 05:55 PM) *

Hey, I just had an idea as to how to use the Wal-Nart after they close it for the Super Wal-Nart....

CITY HALL-NART? Hmmmm kind of has a catchy ring to it!

Posted by: JHeath Feb 19 2008, 11:15 PM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Feb 19 2008, 10:51 PM) *

CITY HALL-NART? Hmmmm kind of has a catchy ring to it!

That's Super City Hall-Nart to you. laugh.gif

Posted by: lovethiscity Feb 20 2008, 07:13 AM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Feb 19 2008, 08:21 PM) *

I am a charitable guy, so I will make a deal with her. I will pay the cost to have her house picked up and moved to the lot that my house sits on. I will have my house torn down and out of the way. Then she will only have to pay taxes on her $100k house and the $25k lot. Heck, I will even take that tax monster lot of hers off of her hands free of charge. Since all she cares about is being able to live in that house, she should jump at the opportunity, right?

You may have missed the point. I did not imply her land was not worth $1.3 million. I meant the land under City Hall was more valuable.

Posted by: Ang Feb 20 2008, 10:31 AM

QUOTE(JHeath @ Feb 19 2008, 10:15 PM) *

That's Super City Hall-Nart to you. laugh.gif


laugh.gif OMG-I'm laughing so hard I'm cryin!!! laugh.gif

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 21 2008, 01:34 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=9967&TM=39933.56

QUOTE
Riverfront District Envisioned
Officials believe more liquor licenses will help attract visitors.

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - When Valparaiso officials had an itch to improve their downtown several years ago, they figured a good way was to attract top-flight restaurants to the five-square-block area.

So Mayor Jon Costas petitioned the state to allow him to create a special district that would allow the city to raise its quota of liquor licenses.

Michigan City officials hope to mimic Valparaiso's success by turning the Trail Creek Corridor into a special riverfront district. That would allow it to attract developers looking to build upscale restaurants along the soon-to-be redeveloped creek.

"The purpose of the legislation is to provide an incentive for economic development to spur development," Michigan City Redevelopment Commission Attorney Michael Bergerson said this week. "It's a tool used to attract investors and that could be a help to the city."

Bergerson said the city hopes by creating a riverfront district from E Street to Lake Michigan, the state's Alcohol and Tobacco Commission will allow developers to apply for liquor licenses.

The city is above its quota of licenses by 13, which could dissuade developers from choosing to build restaurants in what is planned to be a booming Trail Creek Corridor.

"Without creating this district, these new businesses wouldn't be able to exist," Bergerson said. "It's important to the development down there."

The state bases quotas on a city's population by granting one license for every 1,500 residents. The city's population is about 33,000.

Shirley Kirby, office manager for the commission, said Michigan City currently has 35 "three-way licenses" - which allow for the sale of beer, wine and liquor. The quota is 22, but has decreased as the population has dropped.

Two years ago, Valparaiso was able to procure 10 additional licenses for its downtown, and those additional licenses have borne fruit. Three existing restaurants received licenses, and two new restaurants have recently opened.

Valparaiso Economic Development Director Matt Murphy said the city wanted to turn the downtown into a focal point of the town and create a dining destination for people throughout the area.

"We realized that the downtown is important to the city's vitality. We need to be creative to keep it prosperous," Murphy said.

Dan Radke, owner of Pioneer Lumber and part owner of Bridges, a restaurant on Trail Creek, said he thinks creating a riverfront district will be a boon for the city.

"I'm excited about it. It's forward thinking," he said. "That type of business brings business. If we had four, five or 30 places like that to come, then hotels would come in. People wouldn't have to drive. They could just walk around and mingle.

"It would definitely add life to this area."

The Redevelopment Commission will present the plan to the City Council in the next month, Bergerson said. If the council approves the move, it will go to the state.

Contact Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

A Riverfront District
To qualify for the designation of a riverfront district, the area must meet a number of requirements. The most notable are as follows, according to Indiana Code 7.1-3-20-16.1:

• The project boundaries must border on at least one side of a river and may not be located more than 1,500 feet or three city blocks from the river, whichever is greater.

• However, if the area adjacent to the river is incapable of being developed because the area is in a floodplain, or for any other reason that prevents the area from being developed, the distances described (above) are measured from the city blocks located nearest to the river that are capable of being developed.

• The request will also be considered if the permit premises are located within an economic development area, a redevelopment project area, an urban renewal area, a redevelopment area established under Indiana code, an economic development project district, or a community revitalization enhancement district.

• The project must be funded in part with state and city money and the boundaries of the municipal riverfront development project must be designated by ordinance or resolution by the legislative body of the city in which the project is located. - Jason Miller


And the comments, the first of which I believe is from our own Mox1981

QUOTE
rticle comment by: Mox

Riverfront District Envisioned
I like this proactive approach. MC has great resources, and we need leaders who will work together for the future of the area. What a great opportunity!

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008
Article comment by: Marty

Riverfront District Envisioned
Great idea! It will be wonderful for current business owners.

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008
Article comment by: greg jolivette

Riverfront District Envisioned
as a county commissioner in ohio, i know that night time attractions equals more economic development rewards. personally, my family is considering vacationing up the beach where there is more variety of attractions. we hope you pass it because we love michigan city. good luck.

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008
Article comment by: Patrick E Hogan

Riverfront District Envisioned
great idea to drive development and bring exciting night life to Michigan City

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008
Article comment by: Patrick E Hogan

Riverfront District Envisioned
great idea. this is an area ripe for development and this type of development would drive growth to Michigan City.

Posted: Sunday, February 17, 2008
Article comment by: Brian Hogan

Riverfront District Envisioned
Brilliant idea...The Trail Creek corridor holds amazing potential to enhance the entertainment offerings for Michigan City residents, as well as expanded revenue streams from tourism. The visions of developed riverfront can showcase the natural beauty of our lakefront. It would be shameful for our community leaders to turn their backs on this opportunity.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Feb 25 2008, 02:46 PM

This was an email I got today...



QUOTE
Dear Friends,

Please see news that Andrews University Professor Andrew Von Maur shared today.


Professor Andrew Von Maur:

"The Michigan City North End Plan won a 2008 CNU Charter Award of Excellence - the most prestigious national award in the field of New Urban town planning. The award is primarily given to professional projects, but there is a student category. This year, we were the only school that won the award. You can learn more about the award at http://www.cnu.org/awards2008."



The Andrews University North End Plan.

28 graduate students from Andrew's University School of Architecture and Urban Design under Professor Andrew Von Maur held a series of public meetings where residents, business people, public officials, and architects and urban designers with national reputations put forth ideas to redevelop the North End of Michigan City. The ideas were captured and enhanced by the students in a comprehensive plan which looks to capitalize on Michigan City's historic downtown and proximity to Lake Michigan.

See the plan at www.andrewsurbandesign.org



Posted by: southsider2k7 Mar 11 2008, 07:46 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=10799&TM=35340.29

QUOTE
City Study Receives National Attention
Andrews University receiving award for its 2007 North End work.

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - One of the plans designed to completely change Michigan City's North End won favor from a national group which judges projects geared toward urban design.

The Congress for the New Urbanism late last month awarded the Andrews University Architecture School's Urban Design Studio with a 2008 Charter Award. The award was for the study the university recently completed on Michigan City's North End.

The study was the only non-professional work to win a charter award, 14 of which were given to professional studies.

According to the Congress for the New Urbanism, the winning submissions "reveal the power of well-executed urbanism to strengthen communities, achieve broader sustainability and create places worthy of respect and admiration."

The entries were judged by a seven-member panel.

"Any time something that is done about your city wins an award, it's impressive," Mayor Chuck Oberlie said.

The Andrews plan was honored along with several other plans that dealt with urbanization in places as close as Rockville, Md., and as far away as Edinburgh, Scotland, the Bahamas and Thuwal, Saudi Arabia.

Judges said the Andrews study "casts needed attention on economically depressed Michigan City, Indiana, showing it how to capitalize on its valuable urban form and Lake Michigan location."

The award will be presented on April 5, in conjunction with the 16th Congress for the New Urbanism in Austin, Texas.



Contact Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: lovethiscity Mar 11 2008, 07:54 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Mar 11 2008, 08:46 AM) *

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=10799&TM=35340.29

10 years and over $130,000,000 in riverboat money. Money that by law is to be used to lower property taxes and increase economic development. What do we have? Higher than hell property taxes and an award winning plan for economically depressed Michigan City Damm we are in trouble!

Posted by: southsider2k7 Mar 12 2008, 06:46 AM

QUOTE(lovethiscity @ Mar 11 2008, 08:54 PM) *

10 years and over $130,000,000 in riverboat money. Money that by law is to be used to lower property taxes and increase economic development. What do we have? Higher than hell property taxes and an award winning plan for economically depressed Michigan City Damm we are in trouble!


Especially when the news comes out that no developer is willing to take the chance on Michigan City because there is no money for lending right now, because the credit squeeze won't allow it.

That's my prediction.

Posted by: Dave Mar 13 2008, 01:40 AM

from the Blue Chip thread...

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Mar 12 2008, 08:12 AM) *

http://www.post-trib.com/business/835670,casino.article

Boyd Gaming's Blue Chip Casino in Michigan City once again suffered the biggest year-over-year revenue drop with $15.1 million versus $20.6 million for February 2007, though it did bring in more than January's $14.1 million.



And the riverboat money looks like it's going to be dwindling as well...

Could the last one out of MC please turn the lights off?

Posted by: southsider2k7 Mar 13 2008, 05:56 AM

QUOTE(Dave @ Mar 13 2008, 02:40 AM) *

from the Blue Chip thread...
And the riverboat money looks like it's going to be dwindling as well...

Could the last one out of MC please turn the lights off?


Yeah, I am not very optimistic about budgets right now. The time to strike on the North End was 3-5 years ago, when credit was cheap, and developers were just begging to build speculative areas. Then again, we were really busy doing our studies, and thinking up our plans... Now its bad enough builders are walking away from projects in Chicago. I have a hard time believing that they are going to find someone to take a chance in City for a while.

Posted by: Dave Mar 13 2008, 01:13 PM

I've said it before, I expect things to change in MC, but I don't expect it to really start happening for about 4 1/2 to 5 years. One election cycle to get some folks out of office who don't seem to be doing what they need to be doing, and enough time for the economy to rebound from the sub-prime mortgage debacle.

I'm hoping that sometime in 2012 or so, we'll be able to get a "perfect storm" situation -- a progressive city government and an economy that will promote growth. Riding things out until then will be a chore, but I honestly think one of the things that will bring about this kind of change is this message board. My point is that this is one way for people to get involved, and the more people that get involved in local government, the amount of nonsense going on is going to go down, and the amount of progress is going to go up.

Sometimes I wonder if there's someone at city hall who checks this board every morning to see what's being discussed on here. That's just sometimes -- the rest of the time I'm sure of it.

Posted by: JHeath Mar 19 2008, 11:58 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=11110&TM=50573.94

QUOTE
3/19/2008 10:52:00 AM
Council Embraces Chicago Firm's North End Plan

Jason Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - The Michigan City Common Council said Tuesday the North End redevelopment plan presented by a Chicago design firm is a good blueprint for what the city wants to do with Trail Creek.

And members think creating a riverfront entertainment district within the Trail Creek corridor is a needed step in following the plan.

"I believe this is an excellent step in revitalizing the area," at-large councilman Bob McKee said Tuesday. "This is a call to action and implementation. We should consider it a working document."

The council unanimously approved resolutions Tuesday accepting the plan by Chicago design firm Lohan Anderson, agreeing to apply to the state's alcohol and tobacco commission to create a riverfront entertainment district.

The Lohan plan includes a guideline by which to redevelop the Trail Creek corridor from U.S. 12 on the north to E Street on the south, turning the area into an entertainment, residential and retail mecca.

By creating a riverfront district, the city will be able to use an extra allotment of liquor licenses as incentives for developers looking for a place to build a restaurant.

First-Ward Councilman Richard Murphy, whose district encompasses the Trail Creek corridor, lauded both moves made by the council as positive steps in the revitalization of the North End.

"They're vital for us to be able to leverage the assets we have down there," he said. "We must bring more people in here to work and live in these districts. These are two large steps toward that mission."

The plan to apply for additional liquor licenses was spurred by the recent purchase of Michigan City Yacht Club and the plan to turn the building into a public restaurant.

The club sits on the Michigan City harbor near the U.S. Coast Guard station, and its owners - including La Porte County resident Ed Arnold - plan to offer beer and liquor. The city, though, is over its allotment of licenses, making it impossible for Arnold's newly named Michigan City Harbor Grille to apply for a license. Redevelopment Commission attorney Michael Bergerson said Tuesday creating the district in only one small spot would not be helpful to the rest of the area.

Arnold said he and his business partner have begun renovations on the building, in the basement of which the Yacht Club will remain in existence.

Dick Lohan, principal partner of Lohan Anderson, owns a summer home between Michigan City and New Buffalo and told council members Tuesday he's often wondered why Michigan City wasn't booming like cities in Southwest Michigan.

He said his plan should be a good start in creating a boom.

"People come to where life occurs," Lohan said. "You just need to find a developer or developers who will come into town and make a commitment to undertake such a project."



Contact Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.


Posted by: Roger Kaputnik May 8 2008, 08:47 AM

QUOTE(JHeath @ Mar 19 2008, 12:58 PM) *
http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=11110&TM=50573.94





The problem with putting something between Michigan Boulevard and the Creek is that there will be no incentive to put stuff on the other side of the Boulevard. I have addressed this at length, and the City nomenklatura are gonna screw it up again! No wonder--they are by and large the same people!

Posted by: southsider2k7 May 22 2008, 11:32 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=13750&TM=48517.94

QUOTE
Mixed Opinions On A Two-Way Franklin Street
Officials working on new project see a ‘merry-go-round’ of public opinion.

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Tim Haas was perplexed after hearing public comments Wednesday about plans for opening Franklin Street to two-way traffic.

"I didn't get a clear-cut understanding of what people wanted to do," said Haas, the owner of Haas and Associates. "I expected to have more in favor of converting to two-way."

Tim Bietry, head of the Michigan City Chamber of Commerce, said the city "seems to be on a merry-go-round" of shifting public opinion about two-way traffic on Franklin Street.

The Michigan City Redevelopment Commission hired Haas and Associates to develop options for converting traffic flow on Franklin in the downtown area from Fourth to Ninth streets.

Residents turned out for an evening presentation by Haas in the Common Council Chambers on Wednesday.

Mayor Chuck Oberlie threw his support behind the effort. Dan O'Brien, owner of the multi-story Warren Building, has said he would refurbish the structure if the city converted the area from one-way to two-way traffic.

Project manager Cedric Green outlined five parking options to ease the flow of traffic through the downtown corridor. The company inventoried the use of available parking and found it to be adequate.

"There's enough parking capacity for current use," Green said. "No matter what option is used, it never reaches 50 percent capacity."

Green said some recommended changes would be to reduce the speed limit from 30 to 25, relocate hydrants, install removable planters in front of businesses and repair sidewalks.

Karle Hula, owner of Maxine's Restaurant at 521 Franklin St., was more interested in talking about opening a traffic corridor extending to Lake Michigan.

"Why waste money on three or four blocks if you don't have access to the lake," Hula said.

Ed Lysaught, of Lysaught, Salmon & Company at 517 Franklin, said he was against change for change's sake.

"Some of us grew up with parking down here and the place was a mess," Lysaught said. "Why did business owners abandon the downtown? There was no place to park."

Lysaught and others pointed to the need to put up better signs to let people know how to navigate what is referred to as the loop around the North End, including the one-way Pine and Washington streets.

Green said signage is definitely an issue but the city was holding off on developing signs until plans for two-way traffic were completed.

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: JHeath May 22 2008, 12:14 PM

Lysaught sounds like a naysayer in this article. Especially since the project manager claims there's plenty of parking.

QUOTE
Project manager Cedric Green outlined five parking options to ease the flow of traffic through the downtown corridor. The company inventoried the use of available parking and found it to be adequate.

"There's enough parking capacity for current use," Green said. "No matter what option is used, it never reaches 50 percent capacity."


I agree with Karl Hula...If you're going to make it 2-way...open it up all the way to the lake.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik May 22 2008, 02:14 PM

I say (and said, on WIMS this AM) that is makes more sense to open Pine and Washington become 2-way, and an East-West corridor be developed (say, 6th St.). Opening Franklin is a canard.

Posted by: JHeath May 22 2008, 02:25 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ May 22 2008, 03:14 PM) *

I say (and said, on WIMS this AM) that is makes more sense to open Pine and Washington become 2-way, and an East-West corridor be developed (say, 6th St.). Opening Franklin is a canard.

Yes, you did...I heard you on the air this morning. But I respectfully disagree that opening Franklin all the way to the lakefront would be a mistake. I think there are too many out of town visitors who might like to know what a beautiful lakefront we have. If we showcase it, they will visit the area.

We absolutely need a better,more attractive east-west corridor there as well, and with the main entrance to LHP being at 6th & Wabash, it seems like a natural.

But I also believe that we need something to draw the attention back into the downtown area of MC...much like the plan of the former Winski campaign (yes, I am biased...). The two way traffic on Franklin is a good start...but it needs to be carried all the way through.

Posted by: lovethiscity May 22 2008, 07:57 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ May 22 2008, 03:14 PM) *

I say (and said, on WIMS this AM) that is makes more sense to open Pine and Washington become 2-way, and an East-West corridor be developed (say, 6th St.). Opening Franklin is a canard.

As mayor chuck oberlie's award winning Andrews University study says. "Every expert we consulted with and we happen to agree with them Believe that the overall success of any North end re-development, . REQUIRES and DEPENDS on opening Franklin Street back up to the lake"

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik May 23 2008, 10:34 AM

A canard, I tells ya. If you really want a nice City in the area bounded by 11th, the Creek, and LHPlace, you have to have some plan in mind to develop off of the obvious: Opening Pine and Washington opens a much bigger area than just Franklin St. Here is another thing: The Pioneer property is going to go condo, so that will wall off Washington Park from the Trail Creek corridor. Instead of the heart of the city having a visible, accessible park, it will be shut off from those potentially potent areas. The current City planning crowd is not doing anything new, and we are going to have the same old problems for at least another generation. It is a shame.

Posted by: JHeath May 23 2008, 11:09 AM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ May 23 2008, 11:34 AM) *

... The current City planning crowd is not doing anything new, and we are going to have the same old problems for at least another generation. It is a shame.

Again...we need something to draw the attention back into the downtown area of MC... The two way traffic on Franklin is a good start...but it needs to be carried all the way through.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik May 23 2008, 11:55 AM

Here is a picture of how the 2-way/open Franklin St. crowd is picturing the traffic: Four lanes of Studebakers, shiny Ford Country Estate Wagons, full of gaunt Americans with household incomes of $4,200, selecting jeans in either color--blue or green, not one guy with a crew cut looking for a metric anything in South Side Hardware's bins...

Back to reality, people, puh-lease!

Posted by: Michelle May 23 2008, 03:20 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ May 22 2008, 03:14 PM) *

I say (and said, on WIMS this AM) that is makes more sense to open Pine and Washington become 2-way, and an East-West corridor be developed (say, 6th St.).


Pine was the one that confused me when I first moved into town. It seemd like it should be two-way. Having two parallel streets that are one-way north makes no sense at all.

Franklin is fine one-way IMO (I like all the parking), but I won't object if it changes. As long as the delivery trucks stop parking in the middle of the road.

Posted by: Teach May 23 2008, 03:44 PM

QUOTE(Michelle @ May 23 2008, 04:20 PM) *

Pine was the one that confused me when I first moved into town. It seemd like it should be two-way. Having two parallel streets that are one-way north makes no sense at all.

Franklin is fine one-way IMO (I like all the parking), but I won't object if it changes. As long as the delivery trucks stop parking in the middle of the road.


Opening up Franklin Street straight to Lake Michigan appeals to me in some primitive way, but as a logical being I can not find a good reason for investing the money.

If it opened up a view of the Lake, then I think the aesthetics itself would be worth it; but you can't really even see the lakeshore from the back of City Hall. Also, a business at, let's say, 5th Street is not a comfortable walk from the Lake. The most promising area for development that is tied directly to the attraction of Washington Park would be the Swingbelly's/Galveston/Matey's area. If you wanted to move the Library, City Hall, and the Police Station in order to free up that area for similar development, and, in doing so, leave an alley to the Lake, that makes sense. I do not, however, think that it will necessarily stimulate much business south of 5th Street.

Now I've just about convinced myself that opening it up might be worth it. Still, I think the longterm revitalization of the north side hinges on something even more basic: a concentration of year-long residents. Maybe it comes down to those condos that no one likes. You need to have people with money nearby who can serve as the foundation of a customer base for businesses that will also attract seasonal tourists and gamblers. That's why the south end of town is growing: because the middle and upper-middle class people in the area have moved out into the south suburbs (Coolspring).

Posted by: Ang May 24 2008, 07:14 AM

Michelle, as an employee of the library, what are your thoughts on relocation? We all have our own opinions, but you are there every day. What type of an impact would it have if the City decided the library needed to be on Pine St between 5th and 6th streets?

Posted by: Ang Jun 6 2008, 09:24 AM

This could potentially end up being a good thing for Wash. Park. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be a fiasco like so many other projects the parks department has started.

QUOTE
http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=14366&TM=40466.5

New Park Plans Making A Splash
Proposed concept will be at Washington Park.

Amanda Haverstick
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - The Michigan City Park Department is moving forward with plans to add a splash park to Washington Park.

The Park Board on Thursday approved bid specifications so they can start to advertise for bids.

Gerald Fedorchak of G.M. Fedorchak and Associates presented a proposal of what the splash park will look like to the board Thursday night.

"We've been working with several different vendors

for a water park," Fedorchak said. "It's really a high end, high quality park."

Michigan City Parks Superintendent Darrell Garbacik said the splash park will provide an attraction for toddlers and grade school-aged children.

"It's like the sprinklers in your backyard, but on steroids for kids," Garbacik said. "The water squirts out - there's no drowning potential."

Garbacik said the splash park will take the place of the tennis courts. An estimated cost for the project has not yet been determined.

Fedorchak said the Park Department will do the demolition of the tennis courts and the excavation of a large berm near the courts.

"Right now we have a walled-in tennis court area," Fedorchak said. "As you recall, there's a large berm ... that would be a nice are for families to watch kids as they play."

The goal is to have the splash park ready in time for the Labor Dayz festival.

"That's what we're hoping for a best-case scenario," Garbacik said.

The board plans to advertise on June 12 and 19 and open bids in early July. Garbacik said delivery of the equipment, once ordered, may take six to eight weeks.

"The beauty of it, we now will have an alternate water feature down here on those days when the red flags are flying," Garbacik said. "This is going to be a standalone attraction."

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jun 6 2008, 09:52 AM

Interesting. Hopefully it will be a little better utilized than the Tennis Courts.

Posted by: Ang Jun 6 2008, 09:59 AM

I think that's a good plan to put it where the tennis courts are. when I first started reading the story my initial thought was, "Now where in the heck are they going to put THAT?" As I read on I thought, "Ooohhh!! That's a PERFECT spot for that! Especially with it being across from the zoo, the two can play off each other to attract more people.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 6 2008, 12:32 PM

This water park was part of the master plan that was discussed last year and the restaurant in the park was shot down.

Posted by: edgeywood Jun 10 2008, 11:47 AM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jun 6 2008, 10:52 AM) *

Interesting. Hopefully it will be a little better utilized than the Tennis Courts.


Hopefully it will be better maintained than the Tennis Courts.

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jun 10 2008, 12:38 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=14515&TM=52756.48

QUOTE
Commission Considers Franklin Options
Recommendation made to experiment with two-way for street starting after roadwork.
MICHIGAN CITY - North Franklin Street is scheduled to be repaved in the next two months, leading some to think it might be the time to test two-way traffic on the street.

"I recommend we paint the lines differently on the new surface and try it on a trial basis," Michigan City Plan Director John Pugh said Monday. His comments came at the meeting of the Redevelopment Commission.

Commissioners agreed Monday to hold an executive session before its next monthly meeting. At that time, they will walk the area being primed for two-way traffic and make a decision on Pugh's recommendation.

The meeting is likely to be held at the Franklin Street offices of Haas & Associates, the design firm which Monday presented its recommended options for redefined parking along a two-way Franklin Street.

Among those options are five which recommend changing parking to either diagonal or parallel, and one which recommends adding a center lane or median to the street.

One option would create reverse diagonal parking on the west side, meaning northbound vehicles would back into spots. Option two would include conventional diagonal parking and option three would include conventional diagonal on the east with parallel parking on the west.

Option four would create parallel parking on both sides and option five would create parallel on both sides with a parking median.

Haas said the fifth option - the one with an extra parking lane - would be his first choice because it would allow trucks currently causing issues by delivering products on the street, a way to do so without blocking traffic.

"They won't use the alleys now," owner Tim Haas said of many delivery trucks. "That's the option I would choose, but I don't think that's the one the city will choose."

Haas also recommended the city turn Franklin Street into two-way only between the Michigan City Public Library and 8th Street on a trial basis, leaving the block between 8th and 9th streets one-way until judging how people will react to two-way traffic.

Haas said the intersection at 8th and 9th is too narrow for two-way traffic and much costly work would need to be done to widen that intersection. He recommended waiting until after the trial period to decide to spend the money.

Commission President Ken Behrendt, however, said he'd rather do the work at once and avoid a one-block break where drivers would be forced to drive a block west to Washington Street, up a block, then back over to Franklin.

"If you're experimenting, I'd think you'd want to try it from 11th to the library," he said. "I think that's the way to do it."

Contact Jason Miller at jmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 10 2008, 01:09 PM

Oh, brother--as you know, I have employed much enk on this issue; the two-way canard is a waste of time and money. The only good to come out of this is that it will finally be laid to rest.

Oh, brother--as you know, I have employed much enk on this issue; the two-way canard is a waste of time and money. The only good to come out of this is that it will finally be laid to rest.

Posted by: Ang Jun 10 2008, 07:31 PM

So, what happens if they decide they don't like the two-way traffic and go back to one-way? I'm sorry, but trial-schmial! If they're going to change it, then change it. Imagine the chaos it would cause...

Posted by: lovethiscity Jun 10 2008, 08:49 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 6 2008, 01:32 PM) *

This water park was part of the master plan that was discussed last year and the restaurant in the park was shot down.

The restaurant still is in their Master Plan, as is the Hotel

Posted by: lovethiscity Jun 10 2008, 08:51 PM

QUOTE(Ang @ Jun 10 2008, 08:31 PM) *

So, what happens if they decide they don't like the two-way traffic and go back to one-way? I'm sorry, but trial-schmial! If they're going to change it, then change it. Imagine the chaos it would cause...

The plan simply sucks, making Franklin two way between 4th and 8th then one way 8th - 9th makes no sense. Unless you are the Michigan City planner

Posted by: JHeath Jun 11 2008, 11:58 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=14533&TM=50306.89

QUOTE
6/11/2008 11:00:00 AM
Library, City Hall Block Progress
Several months ago I sent a letter to Anvil Chorus regarding the Franklin Street bridge. I shared my feelings about the poorly thought out plans that created obstructions to the lake, that being the library and city hall. Since then many citizens have written to Anvil Chorus, sharing the same feelings as I.

We are the taxpayers, and should have some input as to what we feel is best for our city.d City planners, this is not your city, it is our city. The library and city hall could be placed along Franklin Street in any of the many beautiful buildings.

With the ugly library and unattractive city hall (which was not even built with a marina theme), act as barriers to our beautiful bridge and lake. This caused the demise of the city. Wake up!. We have a beautiful town that is just going by the way side as we build huge, ugly buildings on the south side. We should be inviting quaint shops, gifts shops, restaurants, coffee shops (as Starbucks to put in a store at the North End), plus nautical shops and high-end merchandise shops that would attract our surrounding areas to come to the downtown along our two-way street called Franklin Street.

If you are concerned about Michigan City's appearance and attracting people to the Blue Chip Casino and Lighthouse Place, you should be looking at Michigan Boulevard. Such urban blight! If it called a boulevard, make it a boulevard. Take up those ugly median strips and put in threes and grass. The 1950s in Michigan City shoul dbe revisited and see how this city was warm and inviting. If you want to know what to do, go to New Buffalo. That could be our city.

Love the beach and Michigan City,

Beth (Boyer) Tonsoni

Michigan City

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jun 11 2008, 12:35 PM

I wouldn't call the library "ugly", but I agree with the sentiment of the letter. I am all about taking our town back!

Posted by: Michelle Jun 11 2008, 12:46 PM

QUOTE(Ang @ May 24 2008, 08:14 AM) *

Michelle, as an employee of the library, what are your thoughts on relocation? We all have our own opinions, but you are there every day. What type of an impact would it have if the City decided the library needed to be on Pine St between 5th and 6th streets?


Sorry, Ang, I missed your post until now. I can't really speak for the library. I can say that personally, the location of the library played a small role in my decision to come here. It's a good sign when a library is in a centralized location, since it shows the community values and uses it. It's architecturally unique as well, so I think that should be preserved. It's also important that the library is a main stop for the bus lines.

Beyond that, I think it would be more expensive to relocate the library and city hall than many are anticipating. As a taxpayer (albeit a minor one), I'm not really interested in footing the bill for that when the current facilities are fine. It doesn't seem like it would add much, since you can't see the lake well from the site of City Hall either. Unless we're talking about going through Washington Park as well, which would use some pretty park land.

That's the extent of my objections. I don't think the relative benefits of opening the street to the lake outweigh the costs involved, but I'm keeping my ears open to be persuaded. smile.gif

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 11 2008, 02:17 PM

As I have noted elsewhere, much enk have been spilled over this. Tonsoni is late to the party, frankly, and if she thinks NB is the model to follow, I hope her computer breaks down!

Posted by: Dave Jun 11 2008, 06:51 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 11 2008, 03:17 PM) *

As I have noted elsewhere, much enk have been spilled over this. Tonsoni is late to the party, frankly, and if she thinks NB is the model to follow, I hope her computer breaks down!


Roger, You've been saying a lot about the 'enk' you've spilled on this subject, and how proposed plans for the North end are "canards," so I just want to ask -- if we put you in charge, what exactly would you do to encourage north end redevelopment? I'm curious. You may have set forth something in an earlier post, but refresh my recollection if that's the case. The status quo isn't working, and hasn't been working for nigh on 30 years.

I agree that I don't want MC to end up looking like NB, but I'd prefer NB to the status quo. Things as they are right now suck.

Posted by: Ang Jun 11 2008, 08:17 PM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jun 11 2008, 06:51 PM) *

I agree that I don't want MC to end up looking like NB, but I'd prefer NB to the status quo. Things as they are right now suck.


I pretty much agree with you Dave, and that is why I am not living in Michigan City right now.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 12 2008, 09:26 AM

Main points:

1. The model to use for the Lakefront and the Trail Creek corridor is Grant Park, though in miniature: Open, accessible, useful to the general public.

2. Maximize the target area instead of focusing on narrow strips on a couple of streets. Think Brazil, not Chile.

3. Develop an East-West corridor, targeted for commercial development, from Lighthouse Place to the Boat.



In an outline, these would be the Roman numerals. Each would get several subpoints, naturally, and these can be added as time permits. Perhaps I will start a new thread to put this more complete outline in enk.









Enk (n.) from E-lectronic i-NK, meaning material presented in electronic media. ©Roger Kaputnik 2008; permission to use is given as long as credit is not claimed by the user.

Posted by: JHeath Jun 12 2008, 10:01 AM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 12 2008, 10:26 AM) *

Enk (n.) from E-lectronic i-NK, meaning material presented in electronic media. ©Roger Kaputnik 2008; permission to use is given as long as credit is not claimed by the user.

Off topic, I know...but I saw this word in the http://www.urbandictionary.com a week or two ago.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 12 2008, 11:04 AM

I think I put it here before then. I will still stand on my copyright unless they show that they published it first. If they did, here is my official statement: Dang it!!!

Posted by: Michelle Jun 12 2008, 11:11 AM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 12 2008, 12:04 PM) *

I think I put it here before then. I will still stand on my copyright unless they show that they published it first. If they did, here is my official statement: Dang it!!!


Haha. Please say you'll file suit with that as your argument. I love it biggrin.gif

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 12 2008, 11:14 AM

Who is the lawyer on the MB?

Posted by: Dave Jun 12 2008, 11:34 AM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 12 2008, 10:26 AM) *

Main points:

1. The model to use for the Lakefront and the Trail Creek corridor is Grant Park, though in miniature: Open, accessible, useful to the general public.

2. Maximize the target area instead of focusing on narrow strips on a couple of streets. Think Brazil, not Chile.

3. Develop an East-West corridor, targeted for commercial development, from Lighthouse Place to the Boat.


Points 1 and 2 are not what I was looking for, as they really aren't concrete proposals for action. They may be goals to aim for, and maybe we need another thread for them. I can say this, though -- Chicago and Michigan City are geographically too dissimilar to model one's lakefront park on the other, and to the extent that it can be, I think Washington Park already fills the bill as keeping the lake front public space. Discussion of the removal of the NIPSCO plant should probably be in another thread, though I can see that as a goal to strive for as well.

As for point 3, creating an east-west corridor from the Blue Chip to Lighthouse Place, are you proposing an additional bridge across Trail Creek? If you are, where's the money going to come from to give another access point to the Blue Chip? If you aren't, the existing bridges at E street and US 12 would have to be part of the plan, wouldn't they? I'll eliminate E street, seeing as an east-west commercial corridor on 8th street would pretty effectively gut Elston Grove as a residential area, and I can personally guarantee that that could not be done without years and years and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars of litigation.

If you're east-west corridor is to use the US 12 bridge over Trail Creek, from what I can see from google maps, with the exception of the south side of the street between Spring and Pine and some municipal properties, US 12 along that stretch is all commercial property already. What exactly would you do to promote development on that corridor? I can think of two properties on that corridor that could be used in a different manner than they currently are -- City Hall and the library. But if you're doing something to the library anyway, why not run Franklin Street straight through at the same time?


Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 12 2008, 01:42 PM

In the following, Dave's part is in italics, mine in regular type.






Points 1 and 2 are not what I was looking for, as they really aren't concrete proposals for action. They may be goals to aim for, and maybe we need another thread for them.

They are meant to be major divisions of discussion and planning. Specific proposals would be entered as subtopics.


I can say this, though -- Chicago and Michigan City are geographically too dissimilar to model one's lakefront park on the other, and to the extent that it can be, I think Washington Park already fills the bill as keeping the lake front public space.

Grant Park is mentioned as a model whose general conception is to be an open, accessible front yard to the city. It is not tucked apart from Chicago, it is, as one might say, right there! Washington Park is separated from the bulk of MC by the Creek. My idea is to extend the Park into the heart of the city by using the Trail Creek corridor.


Discussion of the removal of the NIPSCO plant should probably be in another thread, though I can see that as a goal to strive for as well.

Removal of the NIPSCo plant comes under the heading of Major Undertakings. Think of what is involved: Relocation of rail lines, power lines, the building itself, environmental impact reviews of the new site, loss of property tax income, etc.



As for point 3, creating an east-west corridor from the Blue Chip to Lighthouse Place, are you proposing an additional bridge across Trail Creek?

No.

If you are, where's the money going to come from to give another access point to the Blue Chip? If you aren't, the existing bridges at E street and US 12 would have to be part of the plan, wouldn't they?

Not sure of your point. But in any case, I think the area along the Creek to the new park and the part of 12 to around where the drive-in used to be (around the art gallery that is or was there on the North side of 12) or to about where the new Pioneer Lumber is could be included.

I'll eliminate E street, seeing as an east-west commercial corridor on 8th street would pretty effectively gut Elston Grove as a residential area, and I can personally guarantee that that could not be done without years and years and hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars of litigation.

Actually, I have hear Roger Potratz discuss the development of 6th St. as the E/W corridor but just from Wabash St. to Michigan Blvd., which is where it already is. The impact on the residential areas of the so-called Elston Grove area is minimal. The city already owns the old Memorial site. Most of the rest is open or already commercial.




If you're east-west corridor is to use the US 12 bridge over Trail Creek, from what I can see from google maps, with the exception of the south side of the street between Spring and Pine and some municipal properties, US 12 along that stretch is all commercial property already. What exactly would you do to promote development on that corridor?

Exactly? I think whatever anyone would do: Improve ease of access, improve traffic flow, for starters, and demonstrate some change in thinking from that of the previous 40 years. Exactly?? What would anyone do exactly?


I can think of two properties on that corridor that could be used in a different manner than they currently are -- City Hall and the library. But if you're doing something to the library anyway, why not run Franklin Street straight through at the same time?

I am not thinking of making 12 the E/W commercial corridor, so this part is not relevevant. However, I would say that the 6th St thing is to make it a RETAIL commercial corridor, not industrial. I would suggest two-waytraffic on Pine and Washington Sts. be studied. Downtowns all over the place have plenty of one-ways, and it really is not what makes or breaks an area. It would shake things up here, tho', and that is a good thing. You know where I think the Franklin St. canard should go.


One thing that has not been discusssd too much is the access to the beach and lake west of NIPSCo from the Park School area. Whaddya think?

Posted by: Dave Jun 12 2008, 03:43 PM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 12 2008, 02:42 PM) *

Grant Park is mentioned as a model whose general conception is to be an open, accessible front yard to the city. It is not tucked apart from Chicago, it is, as one might say, right there! Washington Park is separated from the bulk of MC by the Creek. My idea is to extend the Park into the heart of the city by using the Trail Creek corridor.


Let me see if I understand what you want here. Your proposal is to create greenspace, on one side or the other of Trail Creek (no way no how the Blue Chip is moving in the forseeable future), from Washington Park to Hansen Park, and possibly all the way to Krueger Park? Interesting idea. I could see where that would be very pretty. I don't see how it would encourage economic redevelopment, though. As for the "heart of the city,", I'm not sure how one determines where the "heart" of a city is, but if geography has anything to do with it, the heart of MC is at least a mile south of 11th street.

QUOTE

Removal of the NIPSCo plant comes under the heading of Major Undertakings. Think of what is involved: Relocation of rail lines, power lines, the building itself, environmental impact reviews of the new site, loss of property tax income, etc.

Agreed. I think it's going to happen sometime in the next 25 years, plus or minus five years. It isn't going to be parkland, though, it's going to be ridiculously expensive condos and cottages.

QUOTE
Actually, I have hear Roger Potratz discuss the development of 6th St. as the E/W corridor but just from Wabash St. to Michigan Blvd., which is where it already is. The impact on the residential areas of the so-called Elston Grove area is minimal. The city already owns the old Memorial site. Most of the rest is open or already commercial.


OK, I couldn't see this too well on googlemaps, so I just went on a field trip. I counted 25 residences on 6th street between Pine and Michigan Blvd. Maybe that's minimal, if you don't personally live there, or if it isn't your neighbors who would be displaced. And how would this happen? Eminent domain proceedings to take people's houses from them so someone can put in a Starbucks? I thought you and I agreed on that sort of use of eminent domain.

QUOTE
Exactly? I think whatever anyone would do: Improve ease of access, improve traffic flow, for starters, and demonstrate some change in thinking from that of the previous 40 years. Exactly?? What would anyone do exactly?


Roger, how can you actually talk about ease of access and improved traffic flow, and call for change in the planning of the past, and practically in the same breath call reopening Franklin Street and making it two way a "canard"? If that damn library wasn't there, ease of access and traffic flow wouldn't even be an issue!


QUOTE
I am not thinking of making 12 the E/W commercial corridor, so this part is not relevevant. However, I would say that the 6th St thing is to make it a RETAIL commercial corridor, not industrial. I would suggest two-waytraffic on Pine and Washington Sts. be studied. Downtowns all over the place have plenty of one-ways, and it really is not what makes or breaks an area. It would shake things up here, tho', and that is a good thing. You know where I think the Franklin St. canard should go.


Heck, come sit on my front porch for an afternoon. Pine Street is two way now. On a typical afternoon at least half a dozen cars cruise past our place going the wrong way. I'm still surprised we haven't seen any head on collisions yet. As for the "canard," see above.

QUOTE
One thing that has not been discusssd too much is the access to the beach and lake west of NIPSCo from the Park School area. Whaddya think?


I think access to that area from the west side would be great, I just don't know how it could be done. US 12, the railroad tracks, and the power lines make that crossing a problem. I don't like pedestrian tunnels (in Chicago they have some for lakefront access under Lake Shore Drive, they're always full of graffiti, trash, and the occasional homeless person), the power lines would make a bridge difficult in addition to its already being expensive, and a street level access corridor, which would be my choice, could be hazardous for pedestrians vs. cars and trains. The best thing I can come up with off the top of my head would be a wide paved access strip roughly where Lincoln Ave. is, including a vehicle barrier and possibly a parking area. Some kind of barrier for pedestrians at the train tracks might be required, those gates that come down when the train is coming. I'd include a bike path running along the lake side of US 12 from at least Pine Street to Mt. Baldy, so people could cross over anywhere along that length for access.



Posted by: Michelle Jun 13 2008, 07:31 AM

QUOTE(Dave @ Jun 12 2008, 04:43 PM) *

If that damn library wasn't there


I prefer reading this as:

"Durn library, get off my lawn!!! You pesky kids!"

It's funnier that way.


Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 13 2008, 07:33 AM

Nice work with the quotes--I wish I could do that!

Reply later.


I like your West Side Access ideas.

Posted by: mcstumper Jun 13 2008, 08:15 AM

QUOTE
OK, I couldn't see this too well on googlemaps, so I just went on a field trip. I counted 25 residences on 6th street between Pine and Michigan Blvd. Maybe that's minimal, if you don't personally live there, or if it isn't your neighbors who would be displaced. And how would this happen? Eminent domain proceedings to take people's houses from them so someone can put in a Starbucks? I thought you and I agreed on that sort of use of eminent domain.


Why would 6th St be the E/W route of choice instead of 5th St? 5th is wider and has no residences on it. Also, it empties right out into the Blocksom property, which is where the heavily lifting in the redevelopment arena is going to be in years to come. Would it be nice if your EW corridor took you directly from the Lighthouse place to your new riverside commercial/dining/entertainment/greenspace district?

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jun 13 2008, 08:41 AM

QUOTE(Roger Kaputnik @ Jun 13 2008, 08:33 AM) *

Nice work with the quotes--I wish I could do that!

Reply later.
I like your West Side Access ideas.


Its not too hard. As you reply, enter in the quote text your self [ quote ], and [ / quote ] except no spaces in between the words.

Posted by: Dave Jun 13 2008, 03:32 PM

QUOTE(mcstumper @ Jun 13 2008, 09:15 AM) *

Why would 6th St be the E/W route of choice instead of 5th St? 5th is wider and has no residences on it. Also, it empties right out into the Blocksom property, which is where the heavily lifting in the redevelopment arena is going to be in years to come. Would it be nice if your EW corridor took you directly from the Lighthouse place to your new riverside commercial/dining/entertainment/greenspace district?


In Roger's vision of the future, Trail Creek is a greenbelt -- public access, no "riverside commercial/dining/entertainment" to it.

As for the quote commands, like Southsider said. I surprised myself with that one, didn't preview, and didn't need to edit!

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jun 16 2008, 03:24 PM

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jun 13 2008, 09:41 AM) *


Its not too hard. As you reply, enter in the quote text your self [ quote ], and [ / quote ] except no spaces in between the words.



What keystrokes are involved? I see brackets and the word "quote" etc. in the post I "replied to here.

Posted by: Dave Jun 16 2008, 07:23 PM

Roger, what you saw when you quoted southsider above was this --

[ quote name='southsider2k7' date='Jun 13 2008, 09:41 AM' post='10668']
Its not too hard. As you reply, enter in the quote text your self [ quote ], and [ / quote ] except no spaces in between the words.
[/ quote]

I added a space before the "q" in the two quote tags from southsider's post so you could see the coding. When you do a direct quote, the software adds that additional part -- name='southsider2k7' date='Jun 13 2008, 09:41 AM' post='10668' -- for purposes of identification, I suppose.

Basically what I did to break up your post was to insert additional bracketed "quote" and "/quote" tags.

so this (with spaces before the q's so it doesn't work, and in living color!):

[ quote name='southsider2k7' date='Jun 13 2008, 09:41 AM' post='10668']
Its not too hard. [/ quote]

My witty interjection.

[ quote]As you reply, enter in the quote text your self [ quote ], and [ / quote ] except no spaces in between the words.
[/ quote]


becomes this (without the spaces, so it actually works, and in regular color):

QUOTE(southsider2k7 @ Jun 13 2008, 09:41 AM) *

Its not too hard.


My witty interjection.

QUOTE
As you reply, enter in the quote text your self [ quote ], and [ / quote ] except no spaces in between the words.



Posted by: JHeath Jul 8 2008, 09:08 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=15573&TM=40359.68

QUOTE
7/8/2008 11:00:00 AM
'Long-Term Study' Says Open Franklin Street
As a resident of Michigan City since 1942, I personally have done a study of the Franklin Street issue. The study results are that Franklin Street needs to be two-way and go all the way to the monument. All plans for the lakefront will not work unless you follow this study.

Feel free to send me a check for thousands of dollars for my study.

David Breitzka

Michigan City


Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Jul 8 2008, 09:51 AM

Ha ha ha!

Posted by: southsider2k7 Jul 23 2008, 12:47 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=50&SubSectionID=75&ArticleID=16127&TM=53317.08

QUOTE
Redevelopment Painfully Slow
Watching the extremely painful progress of development of Michigan City and paying for study after study, one thing is crystal clear - nobody has a clue on what the mission at hand is. Common sense is zero. This politically correct garbage of trying to please everybody is costing us a fortune. For the $500,000 you professionals have spent on studies in the last 14 years we could have moved the library. I didn't say tear it down - move it.

We spent thousands of dollars on the Franklin Street two-way study and now we're on budget constraints? Patriot Park can't get finished and we put on hold the $400,000 splash pad. This circus has to stop because we are going to run out of peanuts to feed the elephants, and there are a lot of elephants in Michigan City politics.

It doesn't matter what we pay the professionals for their opinions. You say it just doesn't fit our wonderful little town. Its either too big or isn't diversified enough for the poor.

There isn't a developer in the country who will ever be able to completely understand Michigan City because it doesn't know what the words "potential" and "opportunity" mean for a community. Billions of dollars pass us by.

The city has spent more on attorney fees than what the Weber Sign company wants for its property. Does that make any sense? It's good old boy at its best.

Build around Blue Chip - there's your free study.

Roger Willoughby

Michigan City

Posted by: southsider2k7 Sep 9 2008, 12:45 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=17262&TM=53065.71

QUOTE
City, Blocksom owners to mediate

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

If agreement isn't hashed out for property price, a trial is slated for Jan. 8.

MICHIGAN CITY - "I believe the end is near," Mike Bergerson, attorney for the Michigan City Redevelopment Commission, told commissioners Monday.

He was talking about an end to legal wrangling between the city and the owners of Trail Creek property at the corner of Michigan Boulevard and Eighth Street. The city wants to obtain the property through eminent domain while the owners have said the city should purchase the property at current market values.

Bergerson said both sides will meet with a mediator on Sept. 22 to resolve differences. If an agreement isn't reached, an Oct. 9 hearing date has been set, at which time an appraiser would be appointed, Bergerson said.

"Ultimately, if the parties can't come to a resolution through mediation or other discussion, the court has set a trial on Jan. 8," he said.

Bergerson told commissioners that negotiations are proceeding for the property purchase and relocation of Blocksom, now located on Trail Creek property targeted for redevelopment. He said an Oct. 6 negotiation session could be the last one.

In other business, John Pugh, director of city planning, said results of a market analysis of the Lohan Anderson plan for the city's North End and Trail Creek corridor will be presented at the Oct. 6 Redevelopment Commission meeting. Tracy Cross, a national residential market analysis firm in Schaumburg, Ill., was selected to conduct the analysis.



Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.


Posted by: southsider2k7 Oct 20 2008, 11:13 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=18180&TM=47680.47

QUOTE
Judge: Appraise Weber, Icehouse sites
Owners alleged city did not make good-faith effort to purchase properties.

By Laurie Wink

The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - A judge has ordered owners of the Weber Sign Service and Icehouse properties to select an appraiser to determine the value of properties at the corner of Michigan Boulevard and Eighth Street.

It's a win for the city, which has been trying to acquire those properties to begin development of the Trail Creek Corridor and had resorted to eminent domain to acquire them. The owners had challenged that in court.

Lake County Superior Court Judge Calvin Hawkins ordered both the property owners and the city to select their own appraisers by Oct. 27. The two appraisers will select a third appraiser and the three will agree on the property's value and submit it to the court by Nov. 2.

A trial date has been scheduled for Jan. 8, 2009, for any party to object to the appraisers' report.

Michael Bergerson, attorney for the Michigan City Redevelopment Commission, said the court decision affirmed actions taken by the commission to obtain the properties.

"It's a big step forward," Bergerson said. "The people in that area should be excited."

He said getting the deed to the properties will allow the city to move forward with property clean-up and the Lafayette/Barker storm sewer project, relieving the threat of flooding for hundreds of homeowners in that area.

Weber Sign Service owners William and Kathy Weber and Icehouse property owners Thomas and Florence Sobkowiak filed the suit in Lake Superior Court. They alleged the Michigan City Redevelopment Commission hadn't made a good faith effort to purchase the properties, and failed to provide them with appraisals.

Hawkins rejected those allegations, and his ruling allows the Redevelopment Commission to proceed with clean-up and to recover cleanup costs from the property owners. Those expenses have been estimated to exceed $1 million, according to Bergerson.

"The acquisition of these properties will result in the cleanup of environmentally contaminated properties which drain into Trail Creek," Bergerson said, "and eventual redevelopment consistent with the Lohan Anderson and St. Andrews University reuse studies."

Initial offers were made to the property owners in 2002, along with an offer to the Webers for an equivalent business site. During the past six years, the Redevelopment Commission has acquired some 15 parcels in the designated redevelopment area.

"It's been extremely frustrating when one side doesn't want to be open to any other negotiation," Bergerson said. "The court certainly affirmed the efforts of the Redevelopment Commission in taking a reasoned and thoughtful approach toward acquiring these properties."

Kathy Weber referred questions about the lawsuit to the Weber's attorney Glenn Kuchel, who did not respond.



Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Oct 20 2008, 11:25 AM

If bergerson is on the bench, will he be involved in these issues any more?

Posted by: southsider2k7 Oct 22 2008, 10:50 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=18313&TM=46402.89

QUOTE
Firm: Trail Creek corridor has great potential

By Kristin Miller
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Within 10 to 12 years, the Trail Creek corridor could be host to about 450 new housing units, plus several restaurants and a couple of parks.

The Michigan City Redevelopment Commission heard a preliminary market analysis on Monday from real estate consulting firm Tracy Cross & Associates, Schaumburg, Ill.

In doing the analysis, the firm researched markets from Kenosha, Wis., to Holland, Mich.

With the economy as it is, ground will not be broken before 2010, 2011 at the latest, firm President Tracy Cross said.

"We're not looking at putting up high-rise developments in the middle of nothingness," he said, adding residential development is the cornerstone of developing the corridor. The firm has identified 22.5 acres of property that could be developed on 14 parcels of land, including two parcels now owned by Blue Chip Casino.

Housing units could include rental apartments, garden condominiums, row homes and single-family detached units.

An original idea was to have several high-rise apartment buildings, but Cross said at the current buying rate of .5 units per month, it would take 340 months to fill a 195-unit building of that type.

"Price, price, price is the most important element of how to develop this community," he said.

The project sizes are key, Cross said. The analysis done shows developments that can be broken down into three phases. For example, a 36-unit condominium on the marina could be built in three 12-unit blocks.

And this way, too, several housing projects could be in the works at the same time, he said.

City Planner John Pugh said the intent is to go out and find a master developer who could work within the analysis, which is expected to be completed by the end of the month.

Erik Doersching, an analyst and executive vice president of the firm, said the company is very confident the ideas presented could be realized. He said the firm's analytical approach and ability to forecast the market accurately makes the plan practical.



Contact Kristin Miller at kmiller@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: JHeath Nov 11 2008, 10:41 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=18845&TM=41065.57

QUOTE
11/11/2008 11:00:00 AM
City makes progress on T. Creek Corridor

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Action on two fronts is clearing the way for city efforts to develop the Trail Creek Corridor from the Blocksom property to the Eighth Street bridge.

Mike Bergerson, Michigan City Redevelopment Commission attorney, said at Monday's meeting property appraisers have been appointed to assess the value of the Weber Sign Service and Icehouse properties at Eighth Street and Michigan Boulevard.

Bergerson expects to have finalized appraisals in time for the Dec. 8 commission meeting. Finalizing the property assessments is the next step in settling a long-fought legal battle between the city and property owners William and Kathy Weber and Thomas and Florence Sobkowiak.

Bergerson also said environmental assessments are being done this week on both properties. Previous assessments at the two adjacent sites estimated cleanup costs at more than $1 million. Current assessments will be more comprehensive and done inside the buildings as well as the grounds.

Lake County Superior Court Judge Calvin Hawkins, who is hearing the case, ruled the Redevelopment Commission may move ahead with cleanup and can request compensation for cleanup costs from the property owners, who have not done any cleanup at the contaminated sites to date.

"That's why this property is worthless," Bergerson said. "It's an impediment to redevelopment. It's a blighted area."

The owners of Weber Sign Service and Icehouse property filed the suit in Lake Superior Court. They claim the city has failed to make a good faith effort to purchase the property at current market values. A trial date has been scheduled for Jan. 8, 2009, in Lake County Superior Court, at which time any party can object to the appraisers' report.

The city made its first offer to the property owners in 2002, along with an offer to give the Webers an equivalent business site. Meanwhile, the Redevelopment Commission has acquired some 15 parcels in the designated redevelopment area.

The other stumbling block to Trail Creek development is the Blocksom & Co. plant on Trail Creek. The Redevelopment Commission has been talking about acquiring the property from Blocksom for almost 10 years.

At this point, Bergerson said, a company consultant is studying the costs of moving existing equipment to a new plant compared to purchasing new equipment for a new site. Blocksom is in the process of locating a suitable site in the area. Progress has been slow on the few issues left to be resolved between the city and manufacturer.

Blocksom & Co. has operated in Michigan City since 1919. It is a diversified manufacturer of natural fiber products for industries such as heating and air-conditioning, furniture, U.S. government and military, construction and aquaculture.

*

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.


Posted by: Roger Kaputnik Nov 11 2008, 12:42 PM

If the small space 'twixt Mich. Blvd. and the Creek is built up, then there will be no incentive to build up the area across Mich. Blvd. The small area will be ok for a while, but the much bigger surrounding area will continue to languish.

I refer the Gentle Reader to the scads of enk on this topic above in this thread and in the several others addressing this issue.

Posted by: southsider2k9 Feb 10 2009, 11:44 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=20928&TM=46146.41

QUOTE
Attorney: Appraisals lower than city's offers

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Appraisals for properties the city has been trying to acquire for more than six years came in lower than the prices the city previously offered the owners.

Attorney Michael Bergerson told the Redevelopment Commission on Monday the three court-appointed appraisers completed their assessments of Weber Sign Service owned by William and Kathy Weber, and the former Icehouse property owned by Thomas and Florence Sobkowiak.

Both properties are at Eighth Street and Michigan Boulevard.

Bergerson said the Weber parcel was appraised at $150,000 and the Sobkowiak land at $300,000. The appraisals do not take into account the cleanup costs for the two properties. Initial environmental assessments of the two adjacent sites put cleanup costs in excess of $1 million.

Lake County Superior Judge Calvin Hawkins is hearing the case, filed by the property owners against the Redevelopment Commission on the grounds the commission hadn't made a good-faith effort to purchase the properties, and failed to provide them with appraisals.

The Redevelopment Commission voted to authorize Bergerson to file an objection to Hawkins' decision to remove remediation costs from the appraisals. Commissioners also voted to pay the total fee of $10,000 to the three appraisers.

At the direction of the commission, Bergerson will ask the judge to allow the city and property owners to try to work out a settlement before the scheduled trial date of March 5 and 6.

"This could save $25,000 in legal fees for each property," Bergerson said.

If a settlement is not reached, Bergerson said he was confident the jury would rule on the property values March 6. A final decision will allow the city to acquire the properties and move forward with the Lafayette/Barker storm sewer project, relieving the threat of flooding for hundreds of area homeowners.

"We've gone far and beyond what would be expected to get this matter resolved," Bergerson said.

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.


Posted by: southsider2k9 Apr 1 2009, 11:29 AM

I know it isn't City news, but it is a pretty good sign to me that any Trail Creek corridor work is DOA until the economy recovers.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=22147&TM=48719.09

QUOTE
NewPorte Landing developer pulls out of project

Craig Davison
For The News-Dispatch

LA PORTE - The developer of a proposed 150-acre retail development north of downtown La Porte has pulled out of the project.

Miller-Valentine Group was the developer of NewPorte Landing until it notified the city last week it was withdrawing, but La Porte Mayor Kathy Chroback has said the project is not dead.

Declining market conditions was the reason for Miller-Valentine's withdrawal, according to a statement. Jerry Atkins, president of Miller-Valentine Commercial Development, did not return calls left at his Cincinnati office.

In a statement, Atkins said they had a "spirit of cooperation" with the city in the venture and left a chance for future involvement.

"Should the economic climate change and the opportunity still be available, we would welcome the chance to take this project to completion," Atkins said.

Chroback said they've been communicating with Miller-Valentine for the past month, but nothing was moving forward. She said she wasn't completely surprised.

"We're trying to be optimistic about it," Chroback said. "It's a setback, obviously. But we've come a long way and gotten the land cleaned up. It will be developed at some point. We're past the worst part of it."

She said city officials were going to try to continue with environmental cleanup at the site. Chroback said she still believes the site will be developed.

"I know that when the economy turns around, we'll be able to market it," she said.

Chroback said the city has not contacted any other developers yet, citing that it's not "a good time to be doing that."

NewPorte Landing is a project years in the making.

It was a large part of former Mayor Leigh Morris's administration. He said the city had a positive relationship with the firm.

"This is obviously very concerning," Morris said. "NewPorte Landing represents probably the best opportunity La Porte has for repositioning itself as a vital community with a major retailing role."

Morris said several changes have happened since he left office, like the economy drastically changing.

Reliance Capitol Management LLC, the company initially contracted to develop the property since March of last year, was acquired by Miller-Valentine in November. Atkins, the CEO of Reliance, was brought on to Miller-Valentine as an executive.

Cleanup was slower on the site than expected and, in September, it was reported that Reliance was having problems finding tenants for the development.

A few years ago, the city acquired 30 acres of the land through eminent domain.

Most of 2007 and 2008 were part of the first phase of cleanup, which included removing the former Allis-Chalmers building and asbestos.

The city could still move forward with phase two of cleanup, even though Miller-Valentine was previously slated to do it.

Community Development and Planning Director Mary Jane Thomas said phase two would cost the city almost $2 million and that figure doesn't include additional investigation costs or design costs.

Phase two includes soil and water testing, as well as an engineered barrier and other work. The city plans to see if grants are available to help with the cost.

Morris said he was disappointed this happened, but said a lot of things have progressed in the past five years. He said it will take persistence and continued effort for it to succeed.

"A lot of things are in line (now)," Morris said.

q

Reporter Timothy O'Connor contributed to this report.

Posted by: southsider2k9 Apr 17 2009, 01:44 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=22537&TM=41997.04

QUOTE
City: Firm can lead to master developer
MICHIGAN CITY - The city could spend some $36,000 to hire a destination development consulting firm to help secure a master developer charged with transforming the city's historic North End.

That's according to John Pugh, Michigan City director of planning. Pugh said he'll recommend to the Redevelopment Commission at its May meeting that it accept a proposal from Hunden Strategic Partners, Chicago, to assist with the search for a master developer.

Finding a developer would be a new experience for the city, Pugh said, and Hunden's expertise would be needed.

"I think he (Hunden) has the contacts that can find some (developers)," Pugh said. "I think it will be kind of a slow process."

Rob Hunden, who lives in Beverly Shores, gave a presentation to the Redevelopment Commission on Monday that outlined his firm's services and qualifications. Hunden Strategic Partners works nationwide and has completed more than 200 projects, primarily in urban areas.

Hunden said it's a time-consuming and expensive process for developers to respond to requests for proposals.

"You want to make sure you're doing the right thing to induce them," he said.

The city has taken the proper steps to commission previous studies that lay the foundation for a developer, according to Hunden. The city paid Lohan-Anderson, a Chicago architecture planning firm, about $30,000 in 2007 to produce a conceptual plan for North End redevelopment. It called for mixed-use residential and retail elements.

In 2008, the city spent another $54,000 to hire Tracy Cross & Associates, a real estate consulting firm based in Schaumburg, Ill., to produce a market assessment study, which was recommended by Lohan-Anderson.

According to The News-Dispatch archives, Redevelopment Commission President Ken Behrendt said the Tracy Cross study "will help investors understand the demographics of the area, the types of residential and commercial development that can be absorbed by the market and the level of interest in it."

Pugh said, "Each (study) is a different task. The plan was first, then the market study and now we'll look for a master developer. We're following a road map."

As a destination development consultant, Hunden said his firm would check credentials and references of master developers, visit their projects and evaluate proposals. Hunden said he worked with Boyd Gaming on the two Blue Chip expansions, as well as projects in Valparaiso, South Bend, Indianapolis, Bloomington and Fort Wayne.

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: southsider2k9 Apr 30 2009, 07:22 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=22773

QUOTE
Affordable housing touted
City native proposes concept as boost to Trail Creek development.

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Should plans for Trail Creek redevelopment include affordable residences for working families and seniors on fixed incomes?

Yes, says Kyle Bach, a Michigan City native who is president and CEO of Mecca Companies, a Mishawaka-based developer of multi-family and senior housing.

"We're interested in becoming the catalyst for the Trail Creek development by providing much-needed affordable housing," Bach said.

He was at the April 13 Redevelopment Commission meeting to urge members to include mixed housing in plans presented to potential master developers. The commission is on the cusp of hiring a consulting firm to help secure a master development company that would transform the city's historic North End.

Bach said he's had preliminary discussions with Mayor Chuck Oberlie and Director of Planning John Pugh about the possibility of building two- and three-bedroom rental townhouses in the square block between Fifth and Sixth streets and Pine and Spring streets - an area largely vacant. He said rents would be about $500 for a one-bedroom and $575 for a two-bedroom unit per month for those with annual incomes of $24,000 to $36,000.

Oberlie said employers in the North End offer a built-in market for a mixed-income housing development.

"The near proximity to work would encourage pedestrian movements versus lengthy daily commutes," Oberlie said. "The inclusion of affordable housing will strengthen the livability of the downtown."

Bach believes there is an untapped need to provide affordable housing to hourly wage employees at Blue Chip Casino and other businesses in the targeted redevelopment area. In a recent informal survey of Blue Chip employees, Bach said nearly all of those he talked to lived outside Michigan City.

"When I asked if they would consider a housing option near their place of work," Bach said, "virtually all responded, 'Yes, if affordable and safe'."

Bach's company completed a similar affordable housing development near Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort in Mount Pleasant, Mich. He said all properties created by Mecca Companies throughout the Midwest are totally occupied and have waiting lists. Residential units are necessary to attract retail development.

"My impression is that the commercial and retail component they're considering is difficult to obtain without a significant amount of rooftops," Bach said.

Besides keeping employee dollars in Michigan City, housing construction would provide jobs to local workers and business for suppliers of building materials, Bach pointed out.

"I hope the Redevelopment Commission heard what I had to say," Bach said.

q

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: Dave Apr 30 2009, 01:27 PM

I'm sorry, but .... WTF?

QUOTE
Oberlie said employers in the North End offer a built-in market for a mixed-income housing development.


Other than the casino and Blocksom, what employers are you talking about Chuck? NIPSCO? City Hall? The North End doesn't seem to have all that many employers, but maybe I don't see them because I live here. Correct me please.

As for Mr. Bach, I can understand why he's interested in mixed income housing -- that's his line of work. However, I really think the north end doesn't need what he's suggesting. The north end has some of the most prime real estate in Indiana, due to it's proximity to Lake Michigan. Targeting this area for mixed income housing doesn't strike me as the best idea.

Posted by: Ang Apr 30 2009, 01:46 PM

I agree with Dave on this issue. And this is why:

QUOTE
"When I asked if they would consider a housing option near their place of work," Bach said, "virtually all responded, 'Yes, if affordable and safe'."


I lived in that neighborhood in the 70's and it wasn't safe back then. So what's changed to make it safe now?


And as for employers on the north end, I believe the Mayor might be thinking about the retail district on Wabash. Those jobs would certainly qualify the lower end of "mixed income" AND they're within a comfortable walking distance of the proposed site.

Posted by: Michelle May 4 2009, 06:21 AM

I'm a little interested in this development, depending on how it pans out. Another rental option is always nice. smile.gif


Posted by: IndyTransplant May 4 2009, 12:27 PM

QUOTE(Ang @ Apr 30 2009, 02:46 PM) *
I agree with Dave on this issue. And this is why:



I lived in that neighborhood in the 70's and it wasn't safe back then. So what's changed to make it safe now?


And as for employers on the north end, I believe the Mayor might be thinking about the retail district on Wabash. Those jobs would certainly qualify the lower end of "mixed income" AND they're within a comfortable walking distance of the proposed site.


As Michelle pointed out that would be less than 2 blocks to the library. There is also the Lighthouse outlets as Ang pointed out, plus the businesses on Franklin Street, the employees at the restaurants on the North End. There are actually very many businesses in that area that employ people and the mixed income housing is a good solution for Michigan City. It has been done successfully in other small cities and even in Indianapolis. it is also not close enough to the lake to be considered prime lake land.

As a newcomer, I am often in the area of Washington, Franklin and Pine between 4th and 9th and like the area. I watch the crime news here, am on the list for crime alerts, and since Michelle works with several policeman also, feel I have some handle on the crime in MC. First of all there is an amazing low amount of murders here (and most of these have been domestic or non-stranger murders), and a very small amount of violent crime. The majority of the crime here seems to fall into the house and business robbery category and drunk or under the influence of something driving. The crime spoken of on this board and the number of unsafe areas spoken of often seems to relate to years back or personal opinions. I told Michelle I would like to check out the company's other housing complexes to see how they are constructed, but overall think the idea is a good one.


Posted by: Ang May 4 2009, 01:36 PM

My experiences are, of course, in the past as I have been gone from MC for four years. However, walking down the Blvd is not a good idea unless you want to be harassed, intimidated, or worse--Period. Housing complexes in that area have typically not ended well. It seems to start out okay, but after a few years they begin to look "slumly" and in disrepair. After a few more years they end up being torn down so they can try again a few years later, a few blocks over, with something else.
I believe the idea is a good one, but the City will have to take steps to make sure the area stays clean and drug/crime free. Don't let happen to the new place as what's happened in the past.

Posted by: IndyTransplant May 4 2009, 08:10 PM

QUOTE(Ang @ May 4 2009, 02:36 PM) *
My experiences are, of course, in the past as I have been gone from MC for four years. However, walking down the Blvd is not a good idea unless you want to be harassed, intimidated, or worse--Period. Housing complexes in that area have typically not ended well. It seems to start out okay, but after a few years they begin to look "slumly" and in disrepair. After a few more years they end up being torn down so they can try again a few years later, a few blocks over, with something else.
I believe the idea is a good one, but the City will have to take steps to make sure the area stays clean and drug/crime free. Don't let happen to the new place as what's happened in the past.


I appreciate the insight and information. The area mentioned was the vacant block between 5th and 6th on Pine. I made a point to go up there this evening and felt perfectly safe. This land is next to what appears to be doctor and other offices, just south of 5th Third Bank and less than a block and a half from the library. While I was there this evening, there were neighbors just south of 6th on Pine chatting on porches and street corners (people in their 40s and 50s mostly) and I saw two children leave the library, carrying books & talking, turn south on Pine and appearing to be heading home together. It was a pleasant spring evening feel. I also drove around the blocks again heading home tonight....neighbors still chatting and no feeling of anything other than people driving by to their homes or night out (some probably casino bound), or relaxing in and around their homes. The businesses of course were closed by then. All in all it left me with the same feelings I have always had in that area. An area of older homes (most kept neat and some quite beautiful and a few needing some work) and businesses and people going about their daily lives.

As I said my concerns fall on how the buildings are constructed. I am most interested in whether they are built well and will withstand the years and weather well. I would like them not to be too out of step with the general architecture of the area just to the south and west of there. But that is not an absolute necessity given that the other buildings just to the north are of a different architecture also. Therefore I would like to drive through other housing areas this company has built.



Posted by: southsider2k9 May 7 2009, 10:35 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=23017&TM=39685.08

QUOTE
Process begins to raze former Icehouse site

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Bulldozers are clearing trees and debris from the former Icehouse property prior to razing the brick building at Michigan Boulevard and Eighth Street on Monday.

That's according to Mike Bergerson, attorney for the Michigan City Redevelopment Commission, which awarded the demolition contract to Bechstein Construction Co., Tinley Park, Ill.

"They will create a berm so runoff doesn't go into Trail Creek," he said. "It will be directed into the sanitary sewer so it can be treated."

The city will take possession of the Weber Sign Service in less than a month, Bergerson said, and that building will remain for possible use by the contractor for the Lafayette/Barker storm sewer project.

Weber Sign Service is owned by William and Kathy Weber, and the former Icehouse property owners are Thomas and Florence Sobkowiak. For six years, they've been fighting the city over the purchase prices offered for their parcels.

Recent appraisals came in lower than previous offers from the city, Bergerson said. And the appraisers didn't include costs of environmental remediation at the sites, estimated by Bergerson to be about $250,000 at this point.

Lake County Superior Judge Calvin Hawkins is hearing the case, which was set to go to trial April 30. A jury will determine fair property prices. However, during an April 26 pre-trial conference, the property owners were given additional time to hire their own environmental remediation experts, Bergerson said. The legal battle has been pushed to July.

"They've only had six years and they've never done anything," Bergerson said about the property owners.

In April, Sobkowiak contacted The News-Dispatch with concerns about how the city has handled Trail Creek property deals. He said the city paid $325,000 to the owners of Benz Marina, which also required cleanup of pollutants. Sobkowiak said his property was sold to the city for $360,000 in 2003, but the offer was rescinded five months later.

According to Bergerson, the payment to Benz Marina owners compensated them for the value of their building. That does not apply to the former Icehouse building, he said. The sale of the Icehouse property was halted by the city after an environmental inspection put the cost of cleanup at close to $1 million, Bergerson said.

Sobkowiak said the city is wasting taxpayer money by paying Bergerson an annual fee for advising the Redevelopment Commission while the Indianapolis firm of Baker & Daniels is litigating the property dispute. Bergerson said he is supervising the work of Baker & Daniels attorneys, and his annual fee covers additional legal services provided to the commission.

The city has been purchasing and remediating former industrial sites along the Trail Creek as part of the North End redevelopment plan. Recently, Michigan City was one of 56 communities in the Great Lakes states to get two $200,000 federal grants for hazardous waste removal at the Norfolk & Western rail spur, west of E Street and south of Trail Creek, and the former Erincraft facility, 742 E. Eighth St. According to city planner John Pugh, that work is expected to start this summer.

The other stumbling block to Trail Creek redevelopment is the Blocksom & Co. plant on Trail Creek, which the Redevelopment Commission has tried to acquire for almost 10 years. Blocksom is attempting to find a suitable relocation site, Bergerson said, and the process of resolving remaining issues between the city and manufacturer has been slow.

Posted by: southsider2k9 Sep 17 2009, 12:12 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=25831

QUOTE
City plans to raze stretch of homes

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - A one-block stretch of properties on East Sixth Street is set to be demolished following the city's purchase of one remaining parcel.

The Redevelopment Commission has authorized its attorney, Michael Bergerson, to move ahead with the purchase of 404 E. Sixth St., where an abandoned house sits. Bergerson said he's been in touch with the property owners and expects to purchase the parcel for an amount under $40,000.

The Redevelopment Commission previously spent about $150,000 to purchase three other properties at 408, 410 and 412 Sixth Street. Two of them were abandoned.

The block runs west off Michigan Boulevard, across The Boulevard from properties included in the Trail Creek redevelopment. The property is considered a prime location for future redevelopment projects, Bergerson said.

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Apr 14 2010, 08:50 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/04/14/news/local/doc4bc3e9a4de020346207667.txt

QUOTE
2 houses left to buy for TC redevelopment

Matt Field/The News-Dispatch An area along Sixth Street West of Michigan Boulevard to be redeveloped as part of the Trail Creek corridor.
Four vacant lots also need acquisition
By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:14 AM CDT
MICHIGAN CITY — With the purchase of just two more houses, the city will control nearly all of the properties officials hope will eventually make up a transformed Trail Creek corridor.

Ken Behrendt, president of the Redevelopment Commission, said that while purchase of two houses isn’t required before the city can begin the search for a developer, it would make the project more appealing to potential developers.

“It’d be less of an unknown for them,” Behrendt said.

In addition to the two houses, commission attorney Michael Bergerson said the commission wants to acquire four vacant lots as part of the project.

Behrendt said a major unresolved issue that the city needs to deal with before issuing a Request for Qualifications, the document that the city will use to find a developer, is the relocation of the Port Authority’s Trail Creek Marina. The commission would like to be able to state in the RFQ that it is working with the Port Authority to find a viable alternative to the present location.

While Behrendt said the Port Authority has agreed to assist the Redevelopment Commission as it moves forward on the project, more work needs to be done. He doesn’t anticipate a problem in finding a workable solution to the marina issue.

“I wouldn’t say it’s standing in the way. It hasn’t been an obstacle; it’s not like they’re not cooperating.”

The four lots are also not necessary to issuing the RFQ document, Bergerson said.

Finding a developer is just one step toward transforming the area.

Behrendt said that due to the weak economy, it’s difficult to predict when development will begin.

“It will be development-ready,” he said. “When the market is ready, then we’ll be ready.”

The city already has reached an agreement with the owners of one of the most important parts of land, the 11-acre Blocksom & Co. site, to include it in the development. The city won’t own the property outright, rather Blocksom will either partner with the developer or sell the property.

Controlling big parcels like Blocksom means the project can move forward even without the properties on Sixth Street, Behrendt said.

“They’re small parcels,” he said. “None of them are along the creek. We have large segments of property that can be developed without them.”

The city has previously agreed to pay Blocksom about $6 million in Tax Increment Financing money to relocate, Behrendt said. It will also loan the company money to either build or buy that facility. He said that even if the corridor is not immediately redeveloped, having Blocksom moved will benefit residents.

The commission also voted at its meeting Monday to find a firm to maintain the properties it does own. City Planner John Pugh said he will look for a firm to mow about a dozen properties that the city has gained control of as it moves forward with the Trail Creek corridor plan. He also received authorizations to find firms to test the soil in the redevelopment area to determine what sort of structures the land can accommodate.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Sep 15 2010, 02:12 PM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/09/15/news/local/doc4c8ef25c2e41c476075454.txt

QUOTE
Trying to spark interest

City officials show off site of redevelopment
By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 5:11 PM CDT
MICHIGAN CITY — City officials took dozens of architects, engineers and others on a tour of the Trail Creek area Friday, with the city hoping to spark the interest of a developer willing to take on the redevelopment project.

Redevelopment Commission President Ken Behrendt said Monday the tour started on a high-up floor at the Blue Chip Casino to give the visitors a view of the entire project area.

“Everybody was impressed with the possibilities,” Behrendt said. “Now we’ll see who actually steps to the table and actually submits proposals.”

Rob Hunden, president of Hunden Strategic Partners, who is working with the commission to find a developer for Trail Creek, appeared disappointed that more actual developers didn’t show up for the tour.

“We were a little bit concerned that the number of developers was pretty low,” he told the commission Monday. “We had a lot of architects and engineers that of course are going to be interested and they are talking to their development contacts.”

The city has been engaged in a long-standing effort to dramatically transform Trail Creek from an industrial area to a residential neighborhood, replete with high-rise towers and other amenities.

Although the city has been working to prepare the area, it needs to find a developer to actually draw up blueprints and begin redevelopment.

City officials appear to be closer to finding a site to relocate the Trail Creek Marina, which occupies 7 acres in the midst of the 25-acre redevelopment area.

At Monday’s meeting, Commission Attorney Michael Bergerson said that the Port Authority, which operates the Trail Creek Marina, won’t be an obstacle as the commission tries to get the redevelopment process started in earnest.

“Further conversations with major stakeholders like Blocksom as well as Port Authority reflect agreement on both parts that those properties and stakeholders will not stand in our way and will support the efforts to redevelop the Trail Creek corridor.”

Blocksom & Co., which occupies 11 acres on the creek, has a relocation site in mind, City Planner John Pugh said.

The city already has an agreement with the company, which will either partner with the eventual developer or sell the property.

Would-be developers have until Oct. 12 to submit their responses to the city’s request for qualifications.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Sep 17 2010, 09:10 AM

http://www.southbendtribune.com/article/20100915/Biz/9150360/1013/Biz

QUOTE
Memorial Hospital & Health System
September 15. 2010 6:59AM
Story
Toolbox
E-Mail Archives SBT Photo Store
Print Newsletter Text Alerts
RSS Talk about it
+
Share
Digg
Newsvine
facebook
Twitter

Delicious
Buzz up!
Mixx

MySpace!
Linkedin
FarkIt!


Text Alerts: Get coupons and special deals sent to your cell phone. Sign up here.
Keen eye on development
Michigan City recruiting proposals for a transformation

By STAN MADDUX
Tribune Correspondent

MICHIGAN CITY — Michigan City is actively trying to recruit developers for a north end groomed for a complete makeover.

More than 40 developers, architects and others in the investment world were given a view of the possibilities on Friday from atop the Blue Chip Casino Hotel and Conference Center.

Officials are hoping the effort will pay dividends when proposals from developers are due in October.

Memorial Hospital & Health System
"There's a real opportunity here for someone with a vision," said Michigan City Mayor Chuck Oberlie.

Seen from the top of the Blue Chip were things like the ongoing beautification and reconstruction of U.S. 35, which is the main corridor leading to the casino and lakefront, along with dirt being moved for the new Gateway Park along Trail Creek across from Blue Chip.

Oberlie said a view of the ongoing construction should help convince prospective higher end commercial and residential developers that Michigan City is serious about launching a complete transformation of the downtown area.

Also showcased from the sky were other strengths such as cleared and cleaned sites that are ready to build on, and traffic created by revenue generators already in place like Blue Chip, Lighthouse Place Premium Outlets and the nearby lakefront.

Progress seems to be speeding up. For years, the city has been preparing for the final push for complete north end redevelopment by acquiring properties along Trail Creek and surrounding areas.

Some were contaminated industrial parcels that are in the process of being cleaned up.

The city's vision is to have hundreds of new residential units and then market them to second homeowners from the Chicago area and young professionals and employees in the downtown who would rather walk or bicycle to work.

By the end of the year, Oberlie said the goal is to find a developer to lay out and implement a plan that could also call for more hotels and other businesses like restaurants and entertainment centers.

"Our purpose is to find the right partner," Oberlie said.

The first construction is possible toward the end of 2012, he said.

Michigan City Area Chamber of Commerce President Tim Bietry said that Michigan City's biggest advantage over other communities is that it's a clean canvas.

"All of the groundwork and all of the infrastructure has been put into place to move on a project of this magnitude," Bietry said.

Posted by: MichiganCityDDS Sep 24 2010, 12:49 AM

the mayor says, "...someone with a vision."
I think we can agree that given the decades-long involvement of the nomenklatura of MC in the planning process, that they are all excluded. I have decided that it would be better to leave the land fallow for another generation of leaders to arise.

Posted by: taxthedeer Sep 24 2010, 01:34 AM

QUOTE(southsiderMMX @ Sep 17 2010, 10:10 AM) *

http://www.southbendtribune.com/article/20100915/Biz/9150360/1013/Biz
I thought they were supposed to start building some sort of hoity-toity "Riverfront Walkway" or whatever it's was supposed to be called which includes shops, eateries and taverns? Weren't they practically giving away liquor licences?

Posted by: lovethiscity Sep 25 2010, 03:14 PM

QUOTE(MichiganCityDDS @ Sep 24 2010, 01:49 AM) *

the mayor says, "...someone with a vision."
I think we can agree that given the decades-long involvement of the nomenklatura of MC in the planning process, that they are all excluded. I have decided that it would be better to leave the land fallow for another generation of leaders to arise.

A dentist with vision and common sense, I like it!

Posted by: southsiderMMX Oct 22 2010, 07:42 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/10/22/news/local/doc4cbd184f47c36335315005.txt

QUOTE
Pugh sets spring as goal for Trail Creek development

By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:12 PM CDT
MICHIGAN CITY — The head of the city’s planning department said Monday he expects four or five developers to express interest in building a housing development along Trail Creek.

“I’m very hopeful we’ll have something to kick off during the spring,” Planning & Redevelopment Director John Pugh said.

“The only caveat is that the economy continues to get better, which we have no control over.”

According to federal government figures, August sales of new single-family homes are down about 30 percent from 2009.

Those numbers could make developers nervous about whether they’ll be able to find home buyers. The city hopes to create about 1,000 units of housing in the redevelopment area, more multi-family than single-family.

“They might have the ability to build it, but unless you have the demand there, you’re not going to be able to sell,” Pugh said.

The city extended the original Oct. 12 deadline to Nov. 18, he continued, because developers asked for more time to respond to the request for qualifications.

“The economy has really not turned around yet and the housing market is pretty low,” he said, “and I think as long as we’re making moves and talking to people, we’re OK.”

Mayor Chuck Oberlie suggested property along the waterfront will be developed first.

“That’s the piece that continues to hold (developers’) imagination and relates to a potential market demand,” he said.

While much of the redevelopment will be along Trail Creek, the 25-acre site extends as far inland as Pine Street.

The city wants a developer with the financial resources to get a project started on its own, without immediate financing from a bank or from investors, he said.

“In our request for (qualifications) we talked about $50 million. When you talk that number, you’re immediately talking to larger companies,” he said.

Although Pugh said it’s realistic to believe economic conditions will improve soon enough for the project to get under way by spring, he acknowledged that developers might still see the climate as too weak for development.

“That could be a factor,” he said.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Dec 2 2010, 11:06 AM

http://www.thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/12/02/news/local/doc4cf5db7021755914759193.txt

QUOTE
7 set sights on Trail Creek

By Matt Field
Staff Writer
Published: Wednesday, December 1, 2010 5:09 PM CST
MICHIGAN CITY — Seven companies have submitted responses to the Redevelopment Commission, expressing their interest in redeveloping a huge swath along Trail Creek.

John Pugh, planning and development department director, said Tuesday the commission soon will begin interviewing the respondents.

“I think the end-result home run would be that we end up with a company that makes us a proposal for Phase One that’s ready to go this early summer,” Pugh said.

What Phase One will entail, however, is not yet known.

“We’re going to sit with the developer to give us some ideas on that,” Pugh said.

Now, Pugh and his colleagues have companies, including Lohan Anderson, the architecture firm that drafted the dominant vision for the Trail Creek corridor in 2007, seemingly interested in the 25-acre development.

Pugh said the companies all met the basic standards the city is seeking.

”They’re all good, they’re all national companies, they all seem to have good backgrounds,” he said.

Even with high unemployment here and nationally, Pugh said the companies see the potential for the economy to rebound.

“I think they see good potential here for a private-public partnership with the city to begin development,” he said.

The Lohan Anderson plan envisions a transformed neighborhood, with high-rise buildings and other amenities replacing low-slung factory buildings. The city hopes to create about 1,000 units of housing in the redevelopment area, more multi-family than single-family.


Posted by: MichiganCityDDS Dec 2 2010, 11:41 AM

If they are planning to build to the water's edge and reduce the public access and eliminate the views, I hope they just leave it the way it is until new blood in charge. No thank-Pugh!

Posted by: edgeywood Dec 5 2010, 08:46 AM

QUOTE(southsiderMMX @ Dec 2 2010, 11:06 AM) *

http://www.thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/12/02/news/local/doc4cf5db7021755914759193.txt


OK, so who is interested besides Lohan Anderson?

Posted by: southsiderMMX Dec 5 2010, 09:09 AM

QUOTE(edgeywood @ Dec 5 2010, 08:46 AM) *

OK, so who is interested besides Lohan Anderson?


I'd really be curious to hear what the pitch was, and how they convinced companies to be interested.

Posted by: southsiderMMX Nov 17 2011, 08:29 AM

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2011/11/17/news/local/doc4ec1d1953266b147694189.txt

QUOTE
Trail Creek master plan now includes Moon Valley, Tryon Farms

By Amanda Jacobson
Staff Writer
Published: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 5:08 PM CST
MICHIGAN CITY — The Michigan City Redevelopment Commission was told Monday night that the Trail Creek Corridor master plan now includes Moon Valley and Tryon Farms as areas of possible environmental redevelopment, in addition to Canada Park, the Waste Inc. site and Karwick Nature Park.

Eric Neagu of Weaver Boos Consultants, South Bend, told the commissioners that the Trail Creek Corridor project has had tremendous support from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and that its second phase of implementation is now in effect.

Neagu said an enthusiastic public support system and EPA backing have helped boost the project’s viability for future implementation.

City Planner John Pugh confirmed the total cost for the next phase of the project will be $94,000.

*
After the discussion of the Trail Creek Corridor Implementation plan, the commission approved a grant proposal for $3,750 to be used for planning work and as funding for the EPA cleanup of the city’s brownfields – underused or unused facilities posing negative environmental effects to surrounding areas.

Tim Haas of Haas & Assoc. then stated to the commission that “everything is in order” to proceed with Divisions A and B of the Elston Grove Historic District Streetscape Project.

The commission then approved a motion to proceed with the Elston Grove project, pending a local hiring meeting later this week.

Also at the meeting:

A 3 percent pay increase for the 2012 fiscal year was approved for the positions of director, secretary, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) director and CDBG administrative assistant. These salary changes were made possible because of a salaried position eliminated this year, freeing up more than $14,000 in annual funds.

A report by Legal Counsel Michael Bergerson determined that by Nov. 28 of this year, the city will have full ownership of the historic Warren Building, which has been planned to house a new artists’ colony through Minneapolis-based Artspace, a non-profit group that develops housing and workplaces for artists.

Posted by: Southsider2k12 Nov 1 2012, 01:04 PM

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release and Forwarding

Date: November 1, 2012

The City of Michigan City would like to extend a warm welcome to Professor Andrew von Maur of Andrews University who will be on the agenda of the Michigan City Common Council meeting on November 7, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at Michigan City City Hall, 100 Michigan Blvd, Michigan City, Indiana 46360. Professor von Maur returns to Michigan City to give a brief presentation to the City Council and members of the public including a "five year look back" on the impact of The Andrews University North End Plan on Michigan City. Professor von Maur will discuss recommendations from the plan that have been implemented thus far, as well as future opportunities that Michigan City has in front of them as it pertains to The North End Plan.

Andrew von Maur professionally collaborates with some of the world's leading town planning offices, including Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company. His Urban Design Studio has been recognized with a 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2012 Charter Award of Excellence by the Congress for the New Urbanism for its urban design and planning work in communities including Saucier, Mississippi, and Michigan City, Indiana. Past projects have led to municipal adoption as well as implementation.

Andrew von Maur holds a professional Bachelor of Architecture degree from Andrews University and a Master of Architectural Design and Urbanism from the University of Notre Dame. Mr. von Maur has remained in touch with city officials for the last five years as the City of Michigan City has achieved various implementations from The North End Plan.

The North End Plan of Michigan City won a charter award for the Congress of New Urbanism which is among the highest architectural awards in the country and can be viewed in its entirety at the link: http://emichigancity.com/cityhall/departments/planning/pdf/andrews-northend-plan.pdf

Posted by: Southsider2k12 Nov 9 2012, 08:15 AM

http://www.nwitimes.com/business/local/michigan-city-sees-progress-with-north-end-plan/article_f058571a-55dc-5cfa-b822-310968af0d7e.html

QUOTE
Stan Madduox Times Correspondent
(0) Comments

More life is returning to Michigan City's once-dormant north end from a strategic plan that is not being allowed to gather dust.

Authors of the plan five years after it was developed have taken notice, and officials sold on the early results vow to pursue the recommendations that have yet to be implemented.

''It really is nice to see the beginning of our planning revolution,'' said city councilman Richard Murphy.

Professor Andrew von Mauer from Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Mich., returned Wednesday to go over the plan and discuss the results with the city council and the audience at City Hall.

''It doesn't seem to be a plan that's been sitting on the shelf,'' von Mauer said.

Among the things catching his attention was the new uptown arts district promoting culture and events luring people into the streets and businesses on the north side, also referred to as the downtown.

Von Mauer, with help from his students at the university's school of architecture in 2007, developed the ''North End Plan'' at the request of city officials frustrated by a longstanding lack of direction for that once-thriving area of the city.

Right away, von Mauer said great potential from the north end's close proximity to the lakefront and major highways like U.S. 35 feeding into it was seen in being able to make healthier the heart or ''essential core of the city.''

The plan included other recommendations like promoting reinvestment of the Elston Grove neighborhood and integrating the north end with the lakefront so both areas can share and grow each of their assets.

In response, the city has poured millions of dollars into sewer and street improvements and beautified a once-blighted U.S. 35 with things such as new streetscapes and landscaping.

There's also been considerable talk of relocating the South Shore line from 11th Street to the lakefront.

Von Mauer said that would bring in more people from Chicago and help with the connection between the lakefront and north end that features attractions like Blue Chip Casino and Lighthouse Place Premium Outlets mall.

Relocating the rail line given its huge cost might take years to materialize, but von Mauer encouraged officials to keep implementing parts of the plan that can be accomplished in short order to build on the recent gains.

''Sticking to it at some level is something we would probably encourage. It's already made a huge difference,'' von Maur said.

Another recommendation being actively pursued is looking for ways to create more housing along Trail Creek, something that could help attract wealthier individuals because of the creek being next to the marina leading to the lake.

City Councilman Tim Bietry said the north end plan is constantly used as a guide for ongoing redevelopment efforts.

Bietry said another task in the plan that could be completed next is converting the empty old Warren Building at 7th and Franklin streets into a facility where artists reside and work in studios.

That could mean another 100 or so new residents to the downtown area.

Bietry said other things being chased include improving access to the north end on U.S. 12 from both the west and east.

Posted by: Southsider2k12 Nov 12 2012, 03:10 PM

http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/sbt-michigan-city-implementing-north-end-plan-20121112,0,5074757.story

QUOTE
Michigan City implementing north end plan
By STAN MADDUX South Bend Tribune Correspondent

10:20 a.m. EST, November 12, 2012

MICHIGAN CITY -- More life is returning to Michigan City's once-dormant north end from a strategic plan that is not being allowed to gather dust.

Authors of the plan five years after it was developed have taken notice, and officials sold on the early results vow to pursue the recommendations that have not yet been implemented.

"It really is nice to see the beginning of our planning revolution," city council member Richard Murphy said.

Professor Andrew von Mauer from Andrews University in Berrien Springs returned last week to go over the plan and discuss the results with the city council and the audience at City Hall.

"It doesn't seem to be a plan that's been sitting on the shelf," von Mauer said.

Among the things catching his attention was the new uptown arts district promoting culture and staging events that's luring people into the streets and businesses on the north side, also referred to as the downtown.

Von Mauer, with help from his students at the university's school of architecture in 2007, developed the "North End Plan" at the request of city officials frustrated by a long-standing lack of direction for that once-thriving area of the city.

Right away, von Mauer said, great potential from the north end's close proximity to the lakefront and major highways like U.S. 35 feeding into it was seen in being able to make healthier "the heart" or "essential core of the city."

The plan included other recommendations like promoting reinvestment of the Elston Grove neighborhood and integrating the north end with the lakefront so both areas can share and grow each of their assets.

In response, the city has poured millions of dollars into sewer and street improvements and beautified a once blighted U.S. 35 with things such as new streetscapes and landscaping.

There's also been considerable talk of relocating the South Shore line from 11th Street to the lakefront.

Von Mauer said that would bring in more people from Chicago and help with the connection between the lakefront and north end that features attractions such as Blue Chip Casino and Lighthouse Place Premium Outlets mall.

Given its huge cost, relocating the rail line might take years to materialize, but von Mauer encouraged officials to keep implementing parts of the plan that can be accomplished in short order to build on the recent gains.

"Sticking to it at some level is something we would probably encourage. It's already made a huge difference," von Maur said.

Fewer empty storefronts and more upscale housing opportunities are among the noticeable changes the last few years.

"We're starting to see the fruit," Murphy said.

Another recommendation being actively pursued is looking for ways to create more housing along Trail Creek, something that could help attract wealthier people because of the creek being next to the marina leading to the lake.

City council member Tim Bietry said the north end plan is constantly used as a guide for ongoing redevelopment efforts.

Bietry said another task in the plan that could be completed next is converting the empty old Warren Building at Seventh and Franklin streets into a facility where artists live and work in studios. That could mean another 100 or so new residents to the downtown area.

Bietry said other things being chased include improving access to the north end on U.S. 12 from both the west and east.

He said there's still a long way to go before the north end is totally revamped but things are off to a good start.

He said one of the keys to advancing the revitalization is keeping up the energy level and uncovering sources of funding that help in areas like building improvements.

"We have to stay the course and we have to convince people that it's not dead, that things are still happening and we're still working on it. The more we get done, the easier it is to sustain that drive that we have now," Bietry said.

Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)